The Indian Supreme Court in Cox & Kings Ltd. v. Sap India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr has ruled that non-signatories to an arbitration agreement can be considered parties to an arbitration under the ‘Group of Companies’ doctrine in India. The judgment has laid down the contours of this doctrine in the Indian context, and we…

In recent years, arbitration in India has grappled with numerous challenges.  Recalcitrant parties knocking on the doors of trigger-happy courts ensured, unfortunately, that arbitration was viewed with mistrust in India.  However, the changes observed in the last few years, including those discussed in our prior year in review posts focused on India (see here, here…

The group of companies doctrine in arbitration has always been contentious in India. The doctrine was first recognised by the Indian Supreme Court in Chloro Controls India Private Limited v. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc. (2013) 1 SCC 641 (hereinafter Chloro Controls). Since then, Indian courts have applied the doctrine to bind group companies of…

The use of the group of companies doctrine in India to join non-signatories to an arbitration is an interesting but underexplored topic. First, since its adoption in 2012, Indian courts have either: (i) applied the doctrine in conjunction with other doctrines including alter ego and piercing of the corporate veil, or (ii) focussed on specific…

Introduction In a previous post, I had surmised whether the Indian courts’ tryst with the group of companies doctrine (“Doctrine”) in the arbitration context is a harbinger or aberration. If the Indian Supreme Court (“SC”) decisions in Reckitt Benckiser v. Reynders Label Printing, decided on 1 July 2019 (“Reynders Label”), and MTNL v. Canara Bank, decided on 8…

and Katherine Bell, Schellenberg Wittmer In 2014, the Swiss Supreme Court rendered 32 decisions on petitions to set aside international arbitral awards. Consistent with a traditionally low success rate, the Supreme Court granted only 4 of the 32 petitions. One of these four petitions was considered in a French-language decision dated 7 April 2014 (Decision…

A recent decision of the German Federal Supreme Court dated 8 May 2014 (case reference no. III ZR 371/12) again calls for a debate on the binding effect of an arbitration agreement for a non-signatory – a well-known and highly-debated phenomenon since the Dow Chemical arbitration. The Dow Chemical case According to the award rendered…