Fear of court intervention must not stop arbitrators from taking a firm stand: Ciccu Mukhopadhaya

Arbitrators should not become hesitant in controlling proceedings merely because they fear that a court may later set aside their award, Senior Advocate Ciccu Mukhopadhaya said on Thursday. .Mukhopadhaya said arbitral institutions can help curb delay tactics, but the ultimate responsibility rests with the tribunal.“It is entirely the job of the Tribunal to control. The Tribunal must have the confidence in itself and not really bother that if the court tomorrow is going to set it aside, so be it. But if you give a well-reasoned order as to why you think the Party should be denied that opportunity again and again, then the court is unlikely that the court will ultimately interfere with it.”.The panel was moderated by Shantanu Agarwal, Managing Partner, Lexster Law. It also included Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, Mahmood Hussain, Founding Partner, M&Co Legal, Dubai, and Olga Tsvetkova, Managing Partner, Brevia Legal, Abu Dhabi, UAE..Mukhopadhyay said parties could delay arbitration at virtually every stage, from appointment of arbitrators and filing of pleadings to document production and adjournment requests.Mukhopadhaya pointed to instances where parties withheld key documents during pleadings and later filed thousands of pages shortly before witness examination.He said he had seen parties suddenly file 10,000 pages at the evidence stage, leaving the other side little time to prepare for rebuttal statements or cross-examination. Tribunals sometimes allowed such documents because they feared that excluding them could later be portrayed as a denial of natural justice..Jethmalani called for tighter statutory timelines and stronger financial consequences for parties that delay proceedings. He said, “A Tribunal that enforces the timetable from the very first filing sets the tone for the entire proceeding. One that indulges the first extension has already lost control of the last.”He suggested that costs be imposed at procedural milestones rather than being deferred until the final award..Hussain said arbitral institutions themselves needed greater transparency and stronger systems to check arbitrator conflicts, appointments and professional relationships.Tsvetkova cautioned that conduct described as a guerrilla tactic may sometimes stem from a party genuinely being unable to obtain justice in the forum originally agreed upon.The discussions at India ADR Week also highlighted newer challenges confronting arbitration..At a separate session on high-value technology-driven M&A disputes, Joanne Lau, Secretary-General of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), said HKIAC had handled 391 technology-related disputes between 2021 and 2025, involving $13.6 billion.The disputes covered cryptocurrency, biotechnology, telecommunications, IT, social media, e-commerce, fintech, gaming, electric vehicles and green technology. Lau said quantum computing, robotics, 6G and advanced forms of AI could also generate future transactions and disputes.The session was moderated by Sheila Ahuja KC, Partner, A&O Shearman, and also featured Edward Taylor, Partner, International Arbitration, A&O Shearman, and Heena Singh, General Counsel, ArcelorMittal India..A third session examined the effect of geopolitics and sanctions on international arbitration.It featured Alexander Petsche, Managing Partner, Baker McKenzie Rechtsanwälte GmbH, Vienna and Board Member, VIAC; Ana Stanic, Director & Founder, E&A Law Limited and Board Member, VIAC; Arush Khanna, Partner, Numen Law Offices; Crenguta Leaua, International Arbitrator and Board Member, VIAC; and Zeina Obeid, Partner, Obeid & Partners.Petsche said war and sanctions had pushed force majeure from a largely theoretical issue into one of the important subjects in international commercial law. The panel also discussed how differing sanctions regimes can affect contractual performance, payments and enforcement of arbitral awards.