High Court rejects Future Group’s petition against Singapore arbitration, Legal News, ET LegalWorld – Legal Firms


The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the Future Group’s petition challenging the Singapore International Arbitration Centre’s (SIAC) order that rejected the retailer’s request for terminating the arbitration proceedings initiated by Amazon Inc.

This will allow proceedings to continue before the Singapore arbitral tribunal from November 28. The Future Group had sought termination of arbitration proceedings on the ground that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) had in December withdrawn its approval of the 2019 deal between Amazon and Future Coupons (FCPL).

The CCI’s decision to hold in “abeyance” its approval followed a complaint that the ecommerce major did not disclose all information related to its deal.

Justice Hari Shankar said that the orders passed by the Singapore tribunal were “plainly, interlocutory orders” and, therefore, it would be inappropriate for the court to interfere with them.

“The arbitral tribunal has not terminated the arbitral proceedings; rather, it has dismissed the petitioners’ (Future Group) application for terminating the proceedings,” he said while dismissing the petitions as “not maintainable”.

The judge also dismissed another Future Group plea against the tribunal’s October order that permitted Amazon to amend its arbitration claim.

The HC cited the Supreme Court’s April 6 order that allowed the SIAC to resume proceedings in the dispute, putting aside the stay by the Delhi High Court three months earlier.

“Any interdiction with the progress of the arbitral proceedings by this court would, therefore, be no less than an affront to the April 6 order passed by the Supreme Court, and would operate to dilute its effect,” the HC said in its 47-page decision.

“Article 144 of the Constitution of India enjoins on all judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court. Even for that reason, therefore, the challenge of the petitioners, in these petitions, cannot be entertained,” the HC said in its 47-page judgment.


Source link