https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800458 Disputes over a liquidator's authority to represent a joint venture and continue an arbitral reference concern representation and continuation of proceedings, rather than the existence of the arbitration agreement or the Tribunal's subject-matter jurisdiction. Consistent with minimal judicial intervention and the Tribunal's competence to rule on jurisdiction, such issues are to be determined within the arbitral process. Supervisory review under Article 227 is confined to exceptional circumstances involving a patent lack of inherent jurisdiction. Delayed objections after notice of the liquidator's asserted authority, particularly following completion of evidence, may support findings of acquiescence and an attempt to derail arbitration rather than grounds for supervisory intervention. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:26:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800458 Disputes over a liquidator's authority to represent a joint venture and continue an arbitral reference concern representation and continuation of proceedings, rather than the existence of the arbitration agreement or the Tribunal's subject-matter jurisdiction. Consistent with minimal judicial intervention and the Tribunal's competence to rule on jurisdiction, such issues are to be determined within the arbitral process. Supervisory review under Article 227 is confined to exceptional circumstances involving a patent lack of inherent jurisdiction. Delayed objections after notice of the liquidator's asserted authority, particularly following completion of evidence, may support findings of acquiescence and an attempt to derail arbitration rather than grounds for supervisory intervention. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800458