1. What importance do events like DAW hold for the Indian legal fraternity?

DAW is extremely important because it’s an institutional step which is being taken by the judiciary itself, and it is being proactive. That is a great message about our seriousness regarding the arbitration setup, both domestic and international. So, it’s a very serious message they give by the institutional involvement, and I think that makes it a very unique program.

2. How can arbitral institutions and law firms collaborate to create further and stronger checks and balances?

Well, I think what must happen is that the law firms which are involved in arbitrations must increasingly push for appointments through institutional arbitrations, and that can be done even through the courts.

The courts are very burdened. So even when there is a Section 11, etc. I think the attempt should be made to use your advocacy skills to promote institutional arbitration because that’s the way forward for greater transparency. We are talking about fraud and party bias of arbitrators, all that can be avoided if there is an arbitral institution which is making the appointments.

3. What are the major key takeaways from panel discussion during Delhi Arbitration weekend?

I would say three important takeaways. First was that corruption is everywhere. It’s not just in India. I mean, you saw the speakers speak about it— the kind of corruption which are happening, and it’s similar everywhere.

Second, the conclusion we came to was that if an arbitral tribunal finds hints of corruption or even if the supervising court finds hints of corruption, then the normal rules of non-inference must give way to a more inquisitorial approach to uncover the fraud. This is necessary to preserve the integrity of the arbitral process itself.

The third takeaway is that since public sector undertakings are involved in a big way in arbitrations, there should be a proper selection of good representation of counsel. There should perhaps be a light vigilance touch when appointments are made on big arbitrations as to whether the person who’s being appointed has the requisite experience or not, because if the person is incompetent, then it is even more difficult for a tribunal to make out whether it’s because of fraud or whether it’s because of incompetence.

One last thing is that arbitration is a hybrid structure between the common law system and the civil law system. The civil law system is more inquisitorial. Its aim is to take a more active approach in finding the truth. Common law is party-based— parties give their representations. I think this is the case where it’s a wakeup call for all of us to realise that the civil law system, as opposed to the trend that civil law is dead and arbitration has been taken over by common law. That’s not the case because if you want integrity in the arbitral process, and to uncover fraud, it has to be more inquisitorial at times, and that’s a civil law function.

4. What are the key differences you have seen in the arbitration ecosystem in India and the UK?

I’ll be very frank; I have not really been involved in domestic arbitration in the UK at all. So, it’ll be very difficult to make a comparison; I won’t be in a position to do that. But yes, I do find that the Indian arbitration system is a very rich ecosystem where you get a lot of exposure to different types of practices which are taking place. As you see, a large number of domestic arbitrations which are there of varying kinds, including those involving fraud, etc.

In the UK, the number of cases would be far fewer, and therefore the scope for being able to think and work on those cases would be less. But as I said, I’m not an expert on the UK ecosystem of arbitration.

5. You have been a part of DAW since the beginning. How have you seen this evolve over the period of time?

I’d say that DAW has had a unique identity from day one, and that has remained the same. It hasn’t really required much evolution. Two or three things about DAW which are very, very wonderful. One, the programs are well spaced out. It’s not multiple programs at once. So, you’re not running around and under tension for choice and for missing out on good speakers. Networking is also a part of the process. You’re missing out on that. So that is one.

Second thing is it’s a very convivial environment. The law chambers are inviting each other. There are arbitrators, lawyers! There’s a whole merging which is taking place. Judges, retired judges, sitting judges, they are participating in this entire thing as learners and as people who want to improve the system. So that collaborative spirit is wonderful.

6. If you have to define Delhi arbitration week in one word, what would that be?

Unity and diversity!