top of page
_edited.png)
Section 34 court cannot re-appreciate evidence on attribution of delay where arbitrator's view is plausible: Delhi high court upholds 10% liquidated damages deduction
Delhi High Court Affirms Arbitrator's Decision: Section 34 Court Cannot Re-evaluate Delay Evidence, Upholds 10% Liquidated Damages Deduction. Geo Miller & Co Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4472 HC Court: High Court of Delhi Case No.: O.M.P. (COMM) 494/2016 Decided on: 27-Jul-26 Coram: Mr. Justice Om Prakash Shukla The Delhi High Court has upheld an arbitral award which found a contractor responsible for delay in completing an EPC project a
Delhi high court: Designation of venue along with institutional arbitration rules indicates seat, rejects objection based on generic jurisdiction clause
Delhi High Court affirms that designating a venue with institutional arbitration rules establishes the seat, dismissing objections based on generic jurisdiction clauses. Case Title: Government of India v. Qingdao Construction Engineering Group Company Ltd. Coram: Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar The Delhi High Court has held that it has territorial jurisdiction to entertain a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, rejecting an application
bottom of page