Post on 09-Apr-2018
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
1/24
Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.
Vs.
SAW Pipes Ltd.
AIR2003SC2629
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
2/24
CASE FACTS
Appellant - ONGC which is a Public Sector
Undertaking, has challenged the arbitral
award dated 2nd May, 1999 by filing
Arbitration Petition No. 917/1999 before the
High Court of Bombay.
Respondent-Company which is engaged in the
business of supplying equipment for Offshore
Oil exploration and maintenance.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
3/24
Cause of the matter:- TENDER
Respondent offered to supply to the appellants 26"diameter and 30" diameter casing pipes.
Respondent placed an order for supply of steel plates,that is, the raw material required for manufacturingthe pipes with Live Laminati, Piani S.P.A., Italiansuppliers stipulating that material must be shippedlatest by the end of September 1996 as timely deliverywas of the essence of the order. It is also their case thatall over Europe including Italy there was a generalstrike of the steel mill workers.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
4/24
COURT'S JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE ARBITRATION ANDCONCILIATION ACT, 1996
"34. Application for setting aside arbitral award-- (1) Recourse to a court againstan arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such awardin accordance with Sub-section (2) and Sub-section (3).
(2)An arbitral award may be set aside by the court only if--
(a) the party making the application furnishes proof that-
(i) a party was under some incapacity, or
(ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties havesubjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law for the time being inforce; or
(iii) the party making the application was not given proper notice of the
appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral or was otherwise unable to presenthis case; or
(iv) the arbitral award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not fallingwithin the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions onmatters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration;
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
5/24
Provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separatedfrom those not so submitted, only that part of the arbitral award which containsdecisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside; or
(v) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not inaccordance with the agreement of the parties, unless such agreement was inconflict with a provision of this Part from which the parties cannot derogate or,
failing such agreement, was not in accordance with this Part; or(b) the court finds that--
(i) the subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration underthe law for the time being in force of
(ii) the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India.
Explanation--Without prejudice to the generality of Sub-clause (ii), it is herebydeclared, for the avoidance of any doubt, that an award is in conflict with the
public policy of India if the making of the award was induced or affected by fraudof corruption or was in violation of Section 75 or Section 81."
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
6/24
28. Rules applicable to substance of dispute-
(1)Where the place of arbitration is situate inIndia--
(a) in an arbitration other than an internationalcommercial arbitration, the arbitral tribunalshall decide the dispute submitted to
arbitration in accordance with thesubstantive law for the time being in force inIndia;
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
7/24
WHAT MEANING COULD BE ASSIGNED TO THE PHRASE 'PUBLICPOLICY OF INDIA'?
The clause which requires interpretation is Clause (ii) of Sub-section2(b) of Section 34 which inter alia provides that the Court may setaside arbitral award if it is in conflict with the 'Public Policy of India'.
The phrase 'Public Policy of India' is not defined under the Act.
It is required to be given meaning in context and also consideringthe purpose of the section and scheme of the Act.
It has been repeatedly stated by various authorities that theexpression 'public policy' does not admit of precise definition and
may vary from generation to generation and from time to time.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
8/24
SirWilliam Holdsworth in his "History of EnglishLaw", Volume III, page 55, has said:
In fact, a body of law like the common law, which
has grown up gradually with the growth of thenation. necessarily acquires some fixed principles,and if it is to maintain these principles it must beable, on the ground of public policy or some
other like ground, to suppress practices which,under ever new disguises seek to weaken ornegative them.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
9/24
The principles governing public policy must be and arecapable, on proper occasion, ofexpansion or modification.
Practices which were considered perfectly normal at onetime have today become obnoxious and oppressive to
public conscience. Above all, in deciding any case which may not be covered
by authority our courts have before them the beacon lightof the Preamble to the Constitution.
Lacking precedent, the court can always be guided by that
light and the principles underlying the Fundamental Rightsand the Directive Principles enshrined in our Constitution.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
10/24
Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Co:AIR1994SC860 , this Court considered Section 7(1) ofthe Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937which inter alia provided that a foreign award may not
be enforced under the said Act, if the Court dealingwith the case is satisfied that the enforcement of theaward will be contrary to the Public Policy.
The Court arrived at the conclusion that Public Policycomprehended in Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the Foreign
Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 isthe 'Public Policy of India' and does not cover thepublic policy of any other country. For giving meaningto the term 'Public Policy.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
11/24
There is nothing to indicate that the expression"public policy" in Article V(2)(b) of the New YorkConvention and Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the ForeignAwards Act is not used in the same sense inwhich it was used in Article I(c) of the GenevaConvention of 1927 and Section 7(1) of theProtocol and Convention Act of 1937. This wouldmean that "public policy" in Section 7(1)(b)(ii)
has been used in a narrower sense and in orderto attract to bar of public policy the enforcementof the award must invoke something more thanthe violation of the law of India.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
12/24
"66. Article V(2)(b) of the New York Conventionof 1958 and Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the ForeignAwards Act do not postulate refusal of
recognition and enforcement of a foreign awardon the ground that it is contrary to the law of thecountry of enforcement and the ground ofchallenge is confined to the recognition and
enforcement being contrary to the public policyof the country in which the award is set to beenforced.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
13/24
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
14/24
the Foreign Awards Act is concerned with
recognition and enforcement of foreign
awards which are governed by the principles
of private international law, the expression
"public policy" in Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the
Foreign Awards Act must necessarily be
construed in the sense the doctrine of publicpolicy is applied in the field ofprivate
international law.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
15/24
Applying the said criteria it must be held that
the enforcement of a foreign award would be
refused on the ground that it is contrary to
public policy if such enforcement would be
contrary to
(i) fundamental policy of Indian law; or
(ii) the interests of India; or
(iii) justice or morality."
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
16/24
Keeping in view the aforesaid objects
underlying FERA and the principles governing
enforcement of exchange control laws
followed in other countries.
To safeguard the economic interests of India
and any violation of the said provisions would
be contrary to the public policy of India asenvisaged in Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the Act."
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
17/24
Duties of Judges
The Judges are to base their decision on the opinionsof men of the world, as distinguished from opinionsbased on legal learning.
The Judges will have to look beyond the jurisprudenceand that in so doing, they must consult not their ownpersonal standards or predilections but those of thedominant opinion at a given moment, or what hasbeen termed customary morality. T
The Judges must consider the social consequences ofthe rule propounded, especially in the light of thefactual evidence available as to its probable results.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
18/24
Usual Method
in foreign arbitration, the award would be
subject to being set aside or suspended by the
competent authority under the relevant law of
that country whereas in the domestic
arbitration the only recourse is to Section 34.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
19/24
Comparision of Arbitration Act in
England & India
The Parliament has not made change while
adopting Article 34 of UNCITRAL Model Law
by not providing error of law as a ground of
appellant submitted that in case where there
is clear violation of challenge to the arbitral
award under Section 34 of the Act.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
20/24
The phrase 'public policy of India' is not
required to be given a narrower meaning.
The award which is passed in contravention ofSections 24, 28 or 31 could be set aside.
Wider meaning is required to be given so as to
prevent frustration of legislation and justice.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
21/24
In the Act of 1940, it was mentioned that the
award must be passed within the reasonable
time fixed by the court.
But on the contrary, in Act of 1996, as such
there in no time limit to pass the award.
For achieving the object of speedier disposal
of dispute, justice in accordance with law
cannot be sacrificed.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
22/24
Therefore, the phrase 'Public Policy of India' used in Section34 in context is required to be given a wider meaning.
It can be stated that the concept of public policy connotessome matter which concerns public good and the public
interest.What is for public good or in public interest orwhat would be injurious or harmful to the public good orpublic interest has varied from time to time.
Illegality must go to the root of the matter and if theillegality is of trivial nature it cannot be held that award is
against the public policy. Award could also be set aside if itis so unfair and unreasonable that it shocks the conscienceof the Court. Such award is opposed to public policy and isrequired to be adjudged void.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
23/24
Decision
The impugned award requires to be set aside mainly on thegrounds:--
(i) there is specific stipulation in the agreement that the timeand date of delivery of the goods was the essence of the
contract; (ii) in case of failure to deliver the goods within the period
fixed for such delivery in the schedule, ONGC was entitled torecover from the contractor liquidated damages as agreed;
(iii) it was also explicitly understood that the agreedliquidated damages were genuine pre-estimate of damages;
Hence, the case was decided in favour of appellant.
8/8/2019 ist presn gaurav
24/24