Skip to content

CS Professional · Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation · Conceptual Framework of International Commercial Arbitration

In an international commercial arbitration, an Indian company and a Japanese company cannot agree on a sole arbitrator, and the Supreme Court is asked to appoint. The Indian company argues that the arbitrator must be Indian. Which statement is correct?

The Court may appoint a neutral arbitrator of a third nationality, since the parties belong to different nationalities and the Act permits appointing a sole or third arbitrator of a nationality other than theirs in an international commercial arbitration.

  1. AThe Court must appoint an Indian national since the seat is in India
  2. BThe Court may appoint an arbitrator of a nationality other than those of the parties, as the parties have different nationalitiesCorrect
  3. CThe Court may appoint only a Japanese national
  4. DThe Court cannot appoint anyone of a third nationality

Explanation

A person of any nationality may be an arbitrator unless the parties agree otherwise, and for a sole or third arbitrator in an international commercial arbitration the appointing authority may choose a nationality different from both parties where they belong to different nationalities.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Conceptual Framework of International Commercial Arbitration shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Conceptual Framework of International Commercial ArbitrationFree diagnostic mock

More Conceptual Framework of International Commercial Arbitration questions