photo-1521587760476-6c12a4b040da.jpeg

News & Updates

 

The case against virtual hearings in Ad Hoc Arbitration

September 19, 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic has undeniably revolutionized both foreign and domestic dispute resolution regimes. Although the transition from in person hearings to virtual hearings was necessitated by the prevailing circumstances, it has led to many difficulties in ad hoc arbitration.

This article delves into issues faced in ad hoc arbitration in light of virtual hearings, due to lack of guidelines and ambiguity in the interpretation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Courts have yet to decide on the issue of whether virtual hearings are prejudicial to the rights of the parties and is a violation of the due process. We contend that the system should essentially promote equity, and not equality, since it is ad hoc arbitration which forms the foundation of the industry, and it is their interests as well which are to be preserved and protected.

Legal implications of banning Chinese apps: Cyberspace no longer independent

July 20, 2020

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology [“MeitY”] under the current regime recently banned 59 Chinese apps. While invoking it’s power under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act r/w Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules 2009 [“Blocking Rules”], the government decided to block the apps due to concerns relating to data security and safeguarding the privacy of Indians. The press release further stated that the compilation of these data, its mining and profiling by elements hostile to national security and defence of India, which ultimately impinges upon the sovereignty and integrity of India, is a matter of very deep and immediate concern which requires emergency measures.

Therefore, it is pertinent to find out whether the order can be challenged in an Indian Court. Further, the author also tried to ascertain the balance between the right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1) and the right to privacy by the Indian Judiciary, relating to banning of apps.

‘Essential Goods and Services’ under IBC: Discrepancies within the judicial interpretation

June 20, 2020

In the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code read with Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Regulations [CIRP Regulations] prohibits the terminations of essential goods and services during the moratorium period. At present, Section 32 of the CIRP Regulations lists electricity, water, telecommunications and information technology as essential services. It further specifies that these commodities are only essential to the extent that ‘they are not a direct input to the output produced or supplied by the corporate debtor’.
The exists an inherent discrepancy within the judicial system pertaining to the interpretation and scope of ‘essential goods & services’. COVID-19 also has it’s due impact on the same. Given the significance of this provision in the corporate insolvency resolution process, there are certain important questions that arise due to such discrepancies.

E-mail :   info@akhilmodi.com
Mobile No. :   0141 - 2504201, + 91 90246 55231

Address :  51-52, Vijay Nagar, Kartarpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan

  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

©2020 by Akhil Modi & Associates.