Skip to content

CS Professional · Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation · Emerging Aspects: Fast Track and Virtual Arbitration

Sharma Textiles Ltd and Kaveri Dyes Pvt Ltd have an arbitration clause. After a dispute arises, but before the tribunal is appointed, both sign a written agreement to use the fast track procedure and to have a sole arbitrator chosen by them. Which statement is correct about this agreement?

The agreement is valid. Under the fast track provision, parties may agree in writing to fast track at any stage before or at the time of appointing the tribunal, and may choose a sole arbitrator. No court approval is required and the timing after the dispute arose does not matter.

  1. AIt is invalid because fast track can be chosen only in the original arbitration clause, not after a dispute arises
  2. BIt is valid because parties may agree in writing to fast track at any stage before or at the time of appointment of the tribunalCorrect
  3. CIt is valid only if the court approves the agreement before the arbitrator is appointed
  4. DIt is valid only if the tribunal has three arbitrators

Explanation

Section 29B(1) lets the parties agree in writing, at any stage either before or at the time of appointment of the tribunal, to fast track. Section 29B(2) allows them to agree on a sole arbitrator chosen by them. So the agreement is valid and no court approval is needed. The first option wrongly limits the timing.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Emerging Aspects: Fast Track and Virtual Arbitration shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Emerging Aspects: Fast Track and Virtual ArbitrationFree diagnostic mock

More Emerging Aspects: Fast Track and Virtual Arbitration questions