Emergency Arbitration: A Comparative Analysis Of Global Standards And India’s 2024 Legislative Framework

Abstract

Emergency arbitration, which offers immediate interim relief prior to the establishment of an arbitral tribunal, has come a long way since its inception by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in 1990, with improvements by institutions such as the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), ICC, and London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA). The procedural frameworks of emergency arbitration under SIAC, ICC, and LCIA, their systematic timelines, emergency arbitrator powers, and award enforceability, are compared with India’s Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which includes emergency arbitration under Section 9A but without specified timelines for the appointment of arbitrators and decisions, in contrast to SIAC’s 24-hour appointment and 14-day decision timelines, ICC’s 2-day appointment and 15-day decision periods, and LCIA’s 3-day appointment and 14-day decision timelines. The paper maps the gaps in India’s model, such as unspecified fees and opt-out provisions, restricting its conformity with international best practices. While taking a leaf from SIAC, India's provisions are underdeveloped, affecting the efficiency of emergency arbitration. The analysis calls for India to follow clearer procedural guidelines and timelines for ensuring the efficacy of emergency arbitration, aligning with international best practices for speedy and fair resolution of urgent commercial disputes.