<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (2) TMI 444 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418193</link>
    <description>Delhi HC held that an arbitration clause in an earlier memorandum could be incorporated into a later memorandum where the later document expressly made all documents executed on 25.11.2019 part of the arrangement. Treating the transaction as a composite commercial structure for investment and equity acquisition, the Court found the arbitration agreement severable and capable of surviving the restructuring. It further held that non-signatory respondents could be referred to arbitration on prima facie satisfaction of common intention, agency, and group of companies principles at the Section 11 stage. The petition for appointment of a sole arbitrator was therefore allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2022 07:18:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=669918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 444 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418193</link>
      <description>Delhi HC held that an arbitration clause in an earlier memorandum could be incorporated into a later memorandum where the later document expressly made all documents executed on 25.11.2019 part of the arrangement. Treating the transaction as a composite commercial structure for investment and equity acquisition, the Court found the arbitration agreement severable and capable of surviving the restructuring. It further held that non-signatory respondents could be referred to arbitration on prima facie satisfaction of common intention, agency, and group of companies principles at the Section 11 stage. The petition for appointment of a sole arbitrator was therefore allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>