#arbitrator ineligibility

The Bombay High Court has held that a unilateral appointment of an arbitrator renders the entire arbitration void ab initio, and this defect cannot be cured even at the execution stage. This ruling extends the Supreme Court’s Bhadra International precedent to execution proceedings, making it clear that parties cannot bypass impartiality safeguards by waiting until enforcement - a critical warning to corporate litigants and arbitrators alike.

Bombay High Court reinforces Supreme Court precedent by invalidating arbitral awards where arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, holding such appointments void ab initio under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Parties might now face fresh arbitration proceedings, with limitation periods adjusted to exclude the voided process duration.

The Bombay High Court ruled that participation in arbitration proceedings does not constitute a valid waiver of objections to a unilateral arbitrator appointment under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act. Only an express written agreement can override the statutory bar, reinforcing the need for mutual consent in arbitrator selection. This decision impacts businesses relying on arbitration clauses, emphasizing strict compliance with procedural fairness.