9/25/2018 · In appeal by special leave, the two-Judge Bench in Union of India v. Hardy Exploration and Production (India) INC1 referred to certain 1 (2018) 7 SCC 374 f 3 decisions from foreign jurisdictions, namely, Naviera Amazonica Peruana S.A. v. Compania Internacional De Seguros Del Peru2, Hiscox v. Outhwaite3, Union of India v.
11/14/2018 · The Supreme Court of India in Union of India v. Hardy Exploration and Production (Civil Appeal No. 4628/2018) ( Hardy II) has dispelled the ambiguity surrounding the determination of the ‘seat’ of arbitration in the absence of parties designating the same , deciding that the ‘place’ or ‘venue’ of arbitration in an arbitration clause can only mean to be ‘seat’ when there is a “prescription for something else”.
4) This appeal arises out of the proceedings (OMP 693/2013) filed by the appellant ( Union of India ) against the respondent-Company under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein the appellant had challenged the legality, validity and correctness of the award made by the arbitrators in respondent’s favour in one international commercial arbitration proceeding between the appellant ( Union of India.
10/27/2018 · The Supreme Court of India has recently, on 25th of September , 2018 dealt with the question of the difference between the “seat”, the “place” and the “venue” of arbitration, in the case of Union of India v. Hardy Exploration and Production (India) INC, C.A. No. 4628 of 2018. This is a follow up post from an earlier short post.
5/11/2018 · SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. Union of India Vs. Hardy Exploration and Production (India) Inc. [Civil Appeal No. 4628 of 2018 arising out of SLP (C) No.31356 of 2016] Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. Leave granted. 2.
5/1/2018 · Hardy Exploration & Production (India) Inc. 2016 SCC OnLine Del 4098, (2016) 232 DLT 384 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Union of India (the …
