Topic
Delhi High Court held that a sole arbitrator appointed solely by one party breaches Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, rendering the award void. It cautions that contract clauses permitting unilateral appointments are ineffective without a written waiver, impacting commercial arbitrations.
A Delhi High Court set aside a 2022 award, declaring it a nullity because the sole arbitrator had been appointed solely by one party without an express written waiver of the ineligibility bar under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act. The ruling makes clear that any such unilateral appointment invalidates the award, affecting parties relying on sole arbitrator clauses.
Bombay High Court rules that an arbitral award based on unilateral arbitrator appointment is void ab initio and unenforceable, even at the execution stage. Parties are granted liberty to initiate fresh arbitration, with the limitation period excluded from the date of arbitration invocation. This reinforces the Supreme Court’s stance in Bhadra International on procedural fairness in arbitration.
Chhattisgarh High Court holds that an arbitral award rendered by a unilaterally appointed arbitrator is void from the outset under Section 12(5) and Schedule 7 of the Arbitration Act, barring execution proceedings. The ruling reinforces statutory disqualification of arbitrators appointed without mutual consent, impacting arbitration clauses in commercial contracts.