https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302862 An anti-arbitration injunction was sought to stop a second arbitration on grounds of constructive res judicata, waiver, abandonment, limitation and inoperability of the arbitration agreement. The court held that strict res judicata did not apply because the earlier arbitration had not decided the incentive-payment claim on the merits. It further found that whether the claim should have been raised earlier, and whether it had been waived or abandoned, depended on disputed facts, contractual interpretation and the accrual of the cause of action, making summary relief inappropriate. The SIAC framework also permitted the tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction. The injunction application was therefore rejected, and the second arbitration was allowed to proceed. en-us Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jun 2022 20:38:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302862 An anti-arbitration injunction was sought to stop a second arbitration on grounds of constructive res judicata, waiver, abandonment, limitation and inoperability of the arbitration agreement. The court held that strict res judicata did not apply because the earlier arbitration had not decided the incentive-payment claim on the merits. It further found that whether the claim should have been raised earlier, and whether it had been waived or abandoned, depended on disputed facts, contractual interpretation and the accrual of the cause of action, making summary relief inappropriate. The SIAC framework also permitted the tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction. The injunction application was therefore rejected, and the second arbitration was allowed to proceed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302862