In a case before the Supreme Court of India, it was held that an arbitration clause cannot be said to be a one time measure and the court turned down an argument that the words “all disputes” occurring in the agreement must be understood to mean “all disputes under the agreement” that might arise between the parties throughout the period of its subsistence.
The words can only refer to disputes that might be in existence when the arbitration clause is invoked and one of the parties to the agreement gives the arbitration notice to the other. They cannot be deemed to refer to disputes that may arise after that.
The court said it cannot be held that once any arbitration clause is invoked the remedy of arbitration is no longer available in regard to other disputes that might arise in future.
On the argument that multiple arbitrations in a contract will cause financial burden to the parties, it was held that this problem can only be remedied by suitably amending the arbitration clause, postponing arbitration till the end of the contract of course keeping in mind the law of limitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment