Referred to Larger Bench XIII: Venue v. Seat, Arbitration

Foreign Cases Cited

  1. Naviera Amazonica Peruana S.A., (1988) (1) Lloyd’s Law Reports 116.
  2. Hiscox, (1992) 1 AC 562.
  3. McDonnell Douglas Corpn., (1993) 2 Lloyd’s Law Rep. 48.
  4. C vs. D, (2007) EWCA Civ 1282 (CA).
  5. C vs. D, (2008) 1 Lloyd’s Law Rep 239. 
  6. Braes of Doune Wind Farm (Scotland) Limited, (2008) EWHC 426 (TCC).
  7. Shashoua, (2009) EWHC 957 (Comm.).
  8. Sulamerica Cia Nacional De Seguros S.A., (2012) EWCA Civ 638.
  9. Enercon GMBH (2) Wobben Properties GMBH, (2012) EWHC 3711 (Comm).
  10. Petrocon India Ltd., (2016) SCC Online MYFC 35.

Indian Cases Cited

  1. National Thermal Power Corporation, (1992) 3 SCC 551.
  2. Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd., (1998) 1 SCC 305. 
  3. Sundaram Finance Ltd., (1999) 2 SCC 479. 
  4. Bhatia International, (2002) 4 SCC 105. 
  5. Venture Global Engineering, (2008) 4 SCC 190. 
  6. Indtel Technical Services Pvt. Ltd., (2008) 10 SCC 308. 
  7. Bank of India & Anr., (2009) 5 SCC 313. 
  8. Citation Infowares Ltd., (2009) 7 SCC 220. 
  9. Ferro Concrete Construction (P) Ltd., (2009) 12 SCC 1. 
  10. Videocon Industries Limited, (2011) 6 SCC 161. 
  11. Dozco India Private Ltd., (2011) 6 SCC 179. 
  12. Yograj Infrastructure Limited, (2011) 9 SCC 735. 
  13. Bharat Aluminium Company, (2012) 9 SCC 552.
  14. Enercon (India) Ltd., (2014) 5 SCC 1.
  15. Reliance Industries Limited, (2014) 7 SCC 603.
  16. Harmony Innovation Shipping Ltd., (2015) 9 SCC 172. 
  17. Reliance Industries, (2015) 10 SCC 213. 
  18. Bharat Aluminum Company, (2016) 4 SCC 126. 
  19. Eitzen Bulk A/S & Ors., (2016) 11 SCC 508. 
  20. Imax Corporation, (2017) 5 SCC 331.
  21. Roger Shashoua, (2017) (14) SCC 722.

My Lord, ‘Venue’ v. ‘Seat’?

The ‘seat’ is important, amongst other things, for determining the applicability of particular laws in Post Arbitral Award – Arbitration Proceedings. In our opinion the question, regarding the ‘seat’ and ‘venue’ for holding Arbitration Proceedings arising under the Arbitration Agreement/International Commercial Arbitration Agreement, is primarily required to be decided keeping in view the terms of the Arbitration Agreement itself. But having regard to the law laid down by this Court, as detailed above, we are of the considered view that this is a fit case to exercise our power under Order 6, Rule 2 of The Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and refer this to be dealt with by a Larger Bench of this Court.”

– Hon’ble Justice Abhay Manohar SapreUnion of India v. Hardy Exploration and Production (India) Inc., [Civil Appeal No. 4628 of 2018].