https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301118 Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act was read as not exhaustive, so the amended regime applied to court proceedings filed after 23.10.2015 in relation to foreign-seated arbitrations. The distinction between proceedings "to" arbitration and those "in relation to" arbitration was treated as significant, bringing court applications within the amended law unless expressly excluded. The proviso to Section 2(2) was construed to allow recourse to Section 9, as well as Sections 27 and parts of Section 37, for international commercial arbitrations seated outside India unless the parties clearly agreed otherwise. A Singapore seat, Singapore governing law, and SIAC Rules were not treated as an implied exclusion of interim relief in India. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Mar 2022 07:46:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301118 Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act was read as not exhaustive, so the amended regime applied to court proceedings filed after 23.10.2015 in relation to foreign-seated arbitrations. The distinction between proceedings "to" arbitration and those "in relation to" arbitration was treated as significant, bringing court applications within the amended law unless expressly excluded. The proviso to Section 2(2) was construed to allow recourse to Section 9, as well as Sections 27 and parts of Section 37, for international commercial arbitrations seated outside India unless the parties clearly agreed otherwise. A Singapore seat, Singapore governing law, and SIAC Rules were not treated as an implied exclusion of interim relief in India. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301118