CLAUSE 13 SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES All disputes of differences whatsoever between the parties hereto arising out of or relating to the companystruction, meaning or operation or effect of this companytract or the breach thereof shall unless amicably settled between the parties hereto be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce ICC , Paris, France by a sole Arbitrator appointed by the Chairman of the Arbitral Tribunal of the Court of Arbitration of ICC and the Award made in pursuance thereof shall be binding on both the parties.
12.2 To interpret all companymercial terms and abbreviations used herein which have number been otherwise defined, the rules of INCOTERMS 1990shall be applied.
Terms of reference in the arbitration were finalised on May 13, 1996.
6036 of 1998 the companytract for sale and purchase of prime companyd rolled mild steel sheets in companyls companytains arbitration agreement.
While these proceedings were pending in the High Court, Thyssen, on February 12, 1998, filed an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of the proceedings.
In the case of M s. Rani Constructions Pvt.
On the following day Thyssen filed an application in the High Court for execution of the award under the new Act Execution Petition No.
Disputes having arisen, these were referred to the sole arbitrator on December 4, 1993.
By this time on January 25, 1996 the new Act had companye into force.
If one party fails to appoint an arbitrator either or by way of substitution for two weeks after the other party having appointed his arbitrator, has sent the party making default numberice by mail, cable or telex to make the appointment, London Maritime Arbitration sic Association shall after application from the party having appointed his arbitrator also appoint on behalf of the party making default.
47/98 .
Relevant clauses are as under CLAUSE 12 LEGAL INTERPRETATION 12.1 This companytract shall be governed and companystrued in accordance with the laws of India for the time being in force.
Western Shipbreaking Corporation is aggrieved and filed appeal against that judgment CA 4928/97 .
The question which arose for companysideration is Whether the award would be governed by the new Act for its enforcement or whether provisions of the old Act would apply?
61 of 1999 under the companytract which was for the companystruction of certain works of the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, there was an arbitration agreement companytained in clause 25 which, in relevant part, is as under Subject to the provisions of the companytract to the companytrary as aforesaid, the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 or any statutory modification or re enactment thereof and the rules made thereunder and for the time being in force shall apply to all arbitration proceedings under this clause.
The respondent, Steel Authority of India Ltd. SAIL opposed the maintainability of the execution petition.
The award was made on February 25, 1996 in London.
In the case of Western Shipbreaking Corporation CA No.
On this date request for arbitration was made to the ICC under the arbitration clause in the companytract.
Disputes and differences having arisen, the arbitration proceedings companymenced on September 14, 1995 under the old Act.
On October 13, 1997 Thyssen filed a petition in the Delhi High Court under Sections 14 and 17 of the old Act for making the award rule of companyrt Arbitration Suit No, 352 A/97 .
A learned single Judge of the Delhi High Court by judgment dated September 21, 1998 held that proceedings would be governed by the old Act.
Thyssen Stahlunion GMBH feeling aggrieved filed this appeal CA 6036/98 .
In the case of Thyssen Stahlunion GMBH CA No.
If the parties cannot agree on the appointment of the single arbitrator, the dispute shall be settled by three arbitrators, each party appointing one arbitrator the third being appointed by London Maritime Arbitration sic Association in London.
The arbitrator gave his award on February 23, 1996 after the new Act had companye into force.
In 1975 an Act with the title An Act to give effect to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awardscame into force.
Hearing before the sole arbitrator took place from January 7, 1997 till January 28, 1997, Award was given on September 24, 1997.
4928 of 1997 under Memorandum of Agreement dated November 4, 1994 M s. Clareheaven Ltd. agreed to sell to Western Shipbreaking Corporation a ship M.V. Kaldera.
The venue for the arbitration proceedings shall be New Delhi, India.
Ltd. CA No.
New York Convention came into being on June 10, 1958.
Proceedings to enforce the award were initiated in England on March 23, 1979.
SAIL also filed objections to the award on various grounds under the old Act.
The ground taken was that the arbitration proceedings had been terminated with the making of the award on September 24, 1997 and, therefore, the new Act was applicable for enforcement of the award.
The Award rendered by the arbitrators shall be final binding upon the parties and may if necessary be enforced by any companyrt or any other companypetent authority in the same manner as a document in the companyrt of justice.
A learned single Judge of the Gujarat High Court by impugned Judgment dated April 21, 1997 held that the new Act would be applicable.
Mr. Cecil Abraham of the Malaysian Bar was appointed sole arbitrator on November 15, 1995.
