Vinod Kumar Dahiya was injured in late 1999 while on a ship en route to Louisiana. At the time, he was employed by Neptune Shipmanagement Services and assigned to a vessel with interests held by the remaining plaintiffs. An arbitration clause in Dahiya’s employment contract required arbitrating any dispute arising out of the contract in Singapore or India. Following a rollercoaster of litigation in Louisiana state and federal courts over the course of two decades, including a state court trial and judgment for Dahiya that was later reversed, the dispute was ultimately arbitrated in India…
Read the complete story here.
When Arbitrator Intelligence promised to increase transparency, accountability, and diversity in arbitrator selection, it was celebrated as a welcome innovation. Now separated from its academic backing, however, it might accomplish...By Katherine Simpson
This article first appeared on Securities Arbitration Alert (SAA) blog, here. I’m again updating my 2016 blog post on the Presidents and arbitration. The material that follows about the past...By George Friedman
This article first appeared in Urbas Arbitral, here. In Parrish & Heimbecker Ltd. v. TSM Winny AG Ltd., 2020 SKQB 348, Mr. Justice Richard W. Elson held that the Convention on the...By Daniel Urbas