<?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>2023 (1) TMI 1352 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312706</link>
    <description>Independent commercial agreements with separate arbitration clauses cannot be merged into one composite reference merely because they are commercially interconnected. Where the contracts provide distinct tribunal mechanisms or seats, separate arbitral treatment remains appropriate, although a party may still seek separate appointment. A notice invoking arbitration is sufficient if it clearly communicates disputes and the intention to arbitrate, and prior consultation requirements may be treated as substantially satisfied by exchanges between the parties. Pending insolvency-related or parallel proceedings do not, by themselves, bar appointment of an arbitrator where the disputes remain arbitrable and no legal impediment to Section 11 relief exists.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2024 09:16:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745629" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 1352 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312706</link>
      <description>Independent commercial agreements with separate arbitration clauses cannot be merged into one composite reference merely because they are commercially interconnected. Where the contracts provide distinct tribunal mechanisms or seats, separate arbitral treatment remains appropriate, although a party may still seek separate appointment. A notice invoking arbitration is sufficient if it clearly communicates disputes and the intention to arbitrate, and prior consultation requirements may be treated as substantially satisfied by exchanges between the parties. Pending insolvency-related or parallel proceedings do not, by themselves, bar appointment of an arbitrator where the disputes remain arbitrable and no legal impediment to Section 11 relief exists.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>