Arbitrability of Oppression & Mismanagement Claims in India: Analysing the Courts’ attempt in playing the see-saw ride

Hatim Hussain[1]

Introduction

The dilemma concerning the arbitrability of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) disputes has been at the forefront of the ‘forum shopping’ debate in India since the 1940s[2]. Under section 241 of the Companies Act 2013 (the “2013 Act”), the NCLT possesses jurisdiction to provide relief in cases of oppression and mismanagement, where it is shown that either the conduct of the majority shareholders is oppressive, or the affairs of the company are conducted in a manner prejudicial to the public interest.[3] The nature of this relief is unique, in the sense that – within the Indian judicial system — it can only be granted by the NCLT. However, the arbitrability of disputes on oppression and mismanagement remains not expressly prohibited by the 2013 Act and parties to such disputes have (conveniently) evaded the scrutiny of national Courts, by referring such disputes to arbitration. National Courts have thus time and again delved deep into the nature of arbitrability of such cases of oppression and mismanagement, often reaching conflicting conclusions, prejudicing the law’s certainty in this area. Continue reading

UPCOMING EVENTS

The Seminars & Events Bulletin for December is here! Check out the event happening at the end of this month too….

Posted by KSLR Commercial & Financial Law Blog on Wednesday, November 28, 2018

UPCOMING EVENTS

6 November, Tuesday1st KCL TTIPills Series EventInvesting in a “Minefield”: Shareholder Voting in Chinese Securities…

Posted by KSLR Commercial & Financial Law Blog on Wednesday, October 31, 2018

THE MORRISONS APPEAL AND VICARIOUS LIABILITY:  DID THE COURT JUST BECOME AN ACCESSORY TO A CRIME?

Meera Manoj, Gujarat National Law University, India

The case of Various Claimants v Wm Morrisons Supermarket PLC (“Morrisons”) decided by the High Court on 12 December 2017[1] is significant for several reasons. In addition to being the first data breach class-action in the United Kingdom, it crucially imposes vicarious liability on Morrison’s Supermarket PLC for the criminal actions of its rogue employee despite the company having taken all reasonable precautions to guard against any data breach.[2] The High Court however granted Morrisons leave to appeal to avoid rendering itself ‘an accessory in furthering the perpetrator’s criminal aims’.[3] Continue reading