<?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>2017 (4) TMI 1617 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307891</link>
    <description>A contractual clause extending arbitration to statutory modifications and re-enactments was treated as sufficient party agreement for the amended arbitration regime to apply to pending proceedings, so no fresh post-amendment consent was required. Once the 2015 Amendment Act applied, the amended disqualification rule barred a serving employee of a party from acting as arbitrator. A serving General Manager of the respondent was therefore ineligible, the unilateral appointment could not continue, and the court appointed an independent sole arbitrator to take the disputes forward from the stage already reached.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 May 2023 08:34:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=713750" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1617 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307891</link>
      <description>A contractual clause extending arbitration to statutory modifications and re-enactments was treated as sufficient party agreement for the amended arbitration regime to apply to pending proceedings, so no fresh post-amendment consent was required. Once the 2015 Amendment Act applied, the amended disqualification rule barred a serving employee of a party from acting as arbitrator. A serving General Manager of the respondent was therefore ineligible, the unilateral appointment could not continue, and the court appointed an independent sole arbitrator to take the disputes forward from the stage already reached.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307891</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>