SC in Exercise of Curative Jurisdiction Set Aside Arbitral Award on Ground That it Was Patently Illegal

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Jul 23, 2024

SC in Exercise of Curative Jurisdiction Set Aside Arbitral Award on Ground That it Was Patently Illegal

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court (‘SC’) in Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited v. Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited^[1], in exercise of its curative jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India (‘Constitution’), set aside an India-seated arbitral award on the ground that it violated the public policy of India and is patently illegal under Section 34(2A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’). The SC held that the exercise of curative jurisdiction should not be adopted as a matter of ordinary course and that it should not be used to open floodgates for intervention in an arbitral award, in review or curative jurisdiction, respectively.

[1] Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited v. Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 522.

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.