LCIA Mumbai symposium examines tribunal powers, interim relief and costs

The arbitration community convened at Mumbai for the LCIA Tylney in Town Symposium, which examined India’s growing role in international dispute resolution..The event held on May 2 brought together leading practitioners, institutional representatives and a senior member of the Indian judiciary to discuss the LCIA Rules, costs, diversity, case management and the future of arbitration in India.The afternoon opened with remarks from Kevin Nash, LCIA Director General and member of the LCIA Board and LCIA Court, who discussed the LCIA Rules and evolving regional dynamics. Nash set the tone for the day with a detailed, India-focused introduction, drawing on the LCIA’s historic connection with India and its continuing engagement with Indian users, counsel, and arbitrators. He emphasised India’s importance in shaping global arbitration practice and underscored the LCIA’s commitment to earning user confidence through institutional credibility, procedural efficiency and gold-standard case management..The opening session was followed by a panel comprising Constantine Partasides KC, a Founding Partner of Three Crowns and member of the LCIA Board, Raj Panchmatia of Khaitan & Co, Shaneen Parikh, former partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, and LCIA Counsel, Deepanshi Ahlawat. Parikh underlined the practical importance of the seat and the governing law of the arbitration agreement. She noted that the LCIA Rules allow parties to choose a seat of arbitration in India but the default provision of London as the seat where parties have not otherwise agreed provides a welcome measure of certainty. She also highlighted confidentiality as a significant advantage of LCIA arbitration, noting that its framework treats confidentiality as an opt-out feature, unlike some systems where parties must specifically opt in.Panchmatia said the LCIA Rules are especially attractive because of their flexibility. He noted that Indian arbitrators appreciate the room the Rules give tribunals to manage proceedings and pointed to emergency arbitration as a useful feature. At the same time, he observed that enforcement remains a practical question where the seat is outside India. In such cases, parties may still need to move Indian courts under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. But, Panchmatia said, if the seat is in India and LCIA Rules apply, the emergency framework becomes far more useful.Partasides placed the institution’s rules and practice in a broader comparative frame. He said the LCIA stands out not only for the quality and consistency of case management and appointments, but also for its longstanding tradition of thought leadership. He said the institution helped create a body of learning that would otherwise have remained inaccessible, which has strengthened the wider arbitration community.The discussion then turned to costs. Ahlawat explained that the LCIA’s cost model is driven by complexity rather than simply the amount in dispute. She said the system includes economic deposits called for in stages during the proceedings, consistent and transparent invoicing, and oversight by both the LCIA Secretariat and the LCIA Court. Nash, who has overseen both ad valorem systems and hourly-rate institutions, noted that the LCIA Costs and Duration Study demonstrates that the LCIA offers significant cost advantages, particularly when the amount in dispute exceeds USD 1 million.Panchmatia said cost is one of the first questions clients ask when comparing institutions, and Nash added that legal fees usually account for most of the overall expense in arbitration, making duration a critical driver of total cost. .The panel also highlighted the LCIA’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Guidelines. Parikh praised the Guidelines for recognising not only gender and demographic diversity but cognitive diversity as well. She said diversity should be merit-based, but merit should be understood broadly and inclusively. .The symposium also featured a Tylney-style session conducted under the Chatham House Rule, co-chaired by director of Drew & Napier Abhinav Bhushan and DSK Legal managing partner Anand Desai. The discussions ranged from public policy and enforcement of awards to whether technical expertise is necessary on tribunals and whether legal qualifications alone are enough for arbitrators. .The symposium concluded with an interview with Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, hosted by Head of International Arbitration and Head of India at Stewarts Law and member of the LCIA Board Sherina Petit, operating strictly under the Chatham House Rule..The session offered participants a valuable opportunity to hear reflections from the bench, informed by judicial experience and a deep understanding of the Indian legal system.