1.

REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS:

In the WTO, regional trade agreements (RTAs) are defined as reciprocal trade agreements
between two or more partners. They include free trade agreements and customs unions. Regional
trade agreements are between countries in a specific region. The most powerful are when they
encompass a few countries that cover a wide and contiguous geographic area. These include
NAFTA and the European Union.

Examples

NAFTA or North American Free Trade Agreement -

NAFTA is the world's largest free trade area. It covers Canada, the United States and Mexico. As
of January 1, 2008, all tariffs between the three countries were eliminated. Between 1993-2009,
trade tripled from $297 billion to $1.6 trillion.

Advantages of Free Trade Agreements:

Free trade agreements are designed to increase trade between two countries. Increased trade has
six main advantages:

1. Increased economic growth. ​The U.S. Trade Representative Office estimates that NAFTA
increased U.S. economic growth by 0.5 percent a year.

2. More dynamic business climate.​ Often, businesses were protected before the agreement.
These local industries risked becoming stagnant and non-competitive on the global market. With
the protection removed, they have the motivation to become true global competitors.

3. Lower government spending. ​Many governments subsidize local industry segments. After
the trade agreement removes subsidies, those funds can be put to better use.

4. Foreign direct investment.​ Investors will flock to the country. This adds capital to expand
local industries and boost domestic businesses. It also brings in U.S. dollars to many formerly
isolated Countries.

5. Expertise.​ Global companies have more expertise than domestic companies to develop local
resources. That's especially true in mining, oil drilling and manufacturing. Free trade agreements
allow the global firms access to these business opportunities. When the multi-nationals partner
with local firms to develop the resources, they train them on the best practices. That gives local
firms access to these new methods.
6. Technology transfer.​ Local companies also receive access to the latest technologies from
their multinational partners. As local economies grow, so do job opportunities. Multi-national
companies provide job training to local employees.
Disadvantages of Free Trade Agreements

The biggest criticism of free trade agreements is that they are responsible for job outsourcing.
There are seven total disadvantages:

1. Increased job outsourcing. Why does that happen? Reducing tariffs on imports allows
companies to expand to other countries. Without tariffs, imports from countries with a low cost
of
living cost less. It makes it difficult for U.S. companies in those same industries to compete, so
they may reduce their workforce. Many U.S. manufacturing industries did, in fact, lay off
workers
as a result of NAFTA. One of the biggest criticisms of NAFTA is that it sent jobs to Mexico.

2. Theft of intellectual property. Many developing countries don't have laws to protect patents,
inventions and new processes. The laws they do have aren't always strictly enforced. As a result,
corporations often have their ideas stolen. They must then compete with lower-priced domestic
knock-offs.

3. Crowd out domestic industries. Many emerging markets are traditional economies that rely
on farming for most employment. These small family farms can't compete with subsidized
agri-businesses in the developed countries. As a result, they lose their farms and must look for
work in the cities. This aggravates unemployment, crime and poverty.

4. Poor working conditions. Multi-national companies may outsource jobs to emerging market
countries without adequate labor protections. As a result, women and children are often
subjected to grueling factory jobs in sub-standard conditions.

5. Degradation of natural resources. Emerging market countries often don’t have many
environmental protections. Free trade leads to depletion of timber, minerals and other natural
resources. Deforestation and strip-mining reduce their jungles and fields to wastelands.

6. Destruction of native cultures. As development moves into isolated areas, indigenous cultures
can be destroyed. Local peoples are uprooted. Many suffer disease and death when their
resources are polluted.
7. Reduced tax revenue. Many smaller countries struggle to replace revenue lost from import
tariffs and fees.

2.TRADE RELATED INVESTMENT MEASURES (TRIMS):

This Agreement, negotiated during the Uruguay Round, applies only to measures that affect
trade in goods. Recognizing that certain investment measures can have trade-restrictive and
distorting effects, it states that no Member shall apply a measure that is prohibited by the
provisions of GATT Article III (national treatment) or Article XI (quantitative restrictions).

The Agreement contains transitional arrangements allowing Members to maintain notified

TRIMs for a limited time following the entry into force of the WTO (two years in the case of
developed country Members, five years for developing country Members, and seven years for
least-developed country Members).

Objectives:

The objectives of the Agreement, as defined in its preamble, include “the expansion and
progressive liberalization of world trade and to facilitate investment across international frontiers
so as to increase the economic growth of all trading partners, particularly developing country
members, while ensuring free competition”.

WTO prohibit investment restricting measures that discriminates foreign investment. The
argument of WTO is that such investment restricting steps are violating trade itself (WTO is an
institution formed to promote trade).

Historically countries impose measures that restrict foreign investment (called as investment
measures and WTO term this as Trade Related Investment Measures).

Under TRIMs, the WTO names the list of investment measures that discriminates foreign
investment and hence violates the basic WTO principle of National Treatment.

These measures include – local content requirement, domestic employment, technology transfer
requirement etc.

What is TRIMs?
The Agreement on TRIMs of the WTO is based on the belief that there is strong connection
between trade and investment. Restrictive measures on investment are trade distorting. Several
restrictive measures on investment are prohibiting trade and hence are not allowable. According
to the TRIMs provision, countries should not adopt the investment measures which restrict and
distort trade.

Investment measures are those steps used traditionally against foreign investment by host
countries. Here, the TRIMs instruct that WTO members may not apply any measure that
discriminates against foreign investment that violates basic WTO principles (like the MFN).

The objective of TRIMs is to ensure fair treatment of investment in all member countries. As per
the TRIMs Agreement, members are required to notify the WTO Council for Trade in Goods of
their existing TRIMs that are inconsistent with the agreement.

TRIMs may include requirements to:

I. Achieve a certain level of local content;
II. Produce locally;
III. Export a given level/percentage of goods;
IV. Balance the amount/percentage of imports with the amount/percentage of exports;
V. Transfer of technology or proprietary business information to local persons.

3.GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN SERVICES (GATS):​ The General Agreement

on Trade in Services (GATS) is a treaty of the World Trade Organization (WTO) that entered
into force in January 1995 as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations.

What is the main purpose of the GATS?

The creation of the GATS was one of the landmark achievements of the Uruguay Round, whose
results entered into force in January 1995. The GATS was inspired by essentially the same
objectives as its counterpart in merchandise trade, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT):
-creating a credible and reliable system of international trade rules;
-ensuring fair and equitable treatment of all participants (principle of non-discrimination);
-stimulating economic activity through guaranteed policy bindings; and
-promoting trade and development through progressive liberalization.

What services are covered?

The GATS applies in principle to all service sectors, with two exceptions. Article I(3) of the
GATS excludes “services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority”. These are services
that are supplied neither on a commercial basis nor in competition with other suppliers. Cases in
point are social security schemes and any other public service, such as health or education that is
provided at non-market conditions.

What are the basic obligations under the GATS?

a) General obligations:
MFN Treatment:​ Under Article II of the GATS, Members are held to extend immediately and
unconditionally to services or services suppliers of all other Members “treatment no less
favourable than that accorded to like services and services suppliers of any other country”. This
amounts to a prohibition, in principle, of preferential arrangements among groups of Members in
individual sectors or of reciprocity provisions which confine access benefits to trading partners
granting similar treatment.

b) Specific Commitments:​ Market Access: Market access is a negotiated commitment in

specified sectors. It may be made subject to various types of limitations that are enumerated in
Article XVI(2). For example, limitations may be imposed on the number of services suppliers,
service operations or employees in the sector; the value of transactions; the legal form of the
service supplier; or the participation of foreign capital.

National Treatment:​ A commitment to national treatment implies that the Member concerned
does not operate discriminatory measures benefiting domestic services or service suppliers. The
key requirement is not to modify, in law or in fact, the conditions of competition in favour of the
Member's own service industry. Again, the extension of national treatment in any particular
sector may be made subject to conditions and qualifications.

4.DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISM UNDER WTO

The WTO’s procedure is a mechanism which is used to settle trade dispute under the Dispute
Settlement Understanding. A dispute arises when a member government believes that another
member government is violating an agreement which has been made in the WTO.

The WTO Agreement provides for the discipline applicable to all dispute settlement procedures
is the “Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes” or
Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU).

Stages in WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

There are mainly three stages to the WTO dispute settlement process:
First Stage – Dispute Settlement Mechanism

Consultations (Article 4) – ​A WTO Member to consult with another Member regarding

“measures affecting the operation of any covered agreement taken within the territory” of the
latter. If a WTO Member requests consultations with another Member under a WTO agreement,
the latter Member must enter into consultations with the former within 30 days. If that fails, they
can also ask the WTO Director-General to mediate or try to help in any other way.
If the dispute is not resolved within 60 days, a panel can be requested.
Second Stage – Dispute Settlement Mechanism

Establishing a Dispute Panel (Articles 6, 8, 12, 15, Appendix 3)

A panel request, which must be made in writing, must “identify the specific measures at issue
and provide a brief summary of the legal basis for the complaint sufficient to present the problem
clearly” (Art. 6.2). If a panel is requested, the country ‘in the dock’ can block the creation of
panel once but the DSB must establish it at the second DSB meeting at which the request appears
as an agenda item unless it decides by consensus not to do so.
The panel is ordinarily composed of three persons. The WTO Secretariat proposes the names of
panelists to the disputing parties, who may not oppose them except for “compelling reasons”
(Art. 8.6). If there is no agreement on panelists within 20 days from the date that the panel is
established, either disputing party may request the WTO Director-General to appoint the panel
members. The maximum time period for the panel to be appointed is 45 days and also, it has to
conclude its decision within 6 months.
A final report is submitted to the two sides and three weeks later, it is circulated to all WTO
members. The report becomes the Dispute Settlement Body’s ruling or recommendation within
60 days unless a consensus rejects it. Both sides can appeal against the report in the Appellate
Body for review.
Appellate Body Review
The DSB establishes a standing Appellate Body that will hear the appeals from panel cases. The
Appellant Body is thus the second and final stage in the adjudicatory part of dispute settlement
system. The Appellate Body “shall be composed of seven persons, three of whom shall serve on
any one case.” Those persons serving on the Appellate Body are to be “persons of recognized
authority, with demonstrated expertise in law, international trade and the subject matter of the
Covered Agreements generally.” The Body shall consider only “issues of law covered in the
panel report and legal interpretations developed by the panel.”
Decisions made by the Appellate Body “may uphold, modify, or reverse the legal findings and
conclusions of the panel.” Normally the appeals should not last more than 60 days, with an
absolute maximum of 90 days. The DSB and the parties shall accept the report by the Appellate
Body without amendments unless the DSB decides by consensus not to adopt the Appellate
Body report within thirty days following its circulation to the members.
Third Stage – Dispute Settlement Mechanism

Implementation of Panel and Appellate Body Ruling (Article 21)

● After the adoption of the rulings/reports of the panel or Appellate Body, the conclusions
and recommendations in the report become binding on the parties.
● A member who does bring its WTO inconsistency into the conformity with the WTO
Agreement risks consequences, like facing retaliatory countermeasures.
● There is no obligation to withdraw the WTO-consistent measure in the event of a
successful non-violation complaint.
● The adopted report is also binding with regard to panel’s or the Appellate Body’s
conclusion as to whether or not a benefit accruing to the complainant under a covered
agreement has been nullified or impaired. There is no obligation to withdraw the
WTO-consistent measure that resulted in nullification or impairment. The parties shall
find a mutually satisfactory adjustment.
● The adopted report is also binding on the complainant.
 ● The complainant shall not determine unilaterally that a violation of the WTO Agreement
or that nullification or impairment of a benefit has occurred if it is inconsistent with the
findings contained in the report.

Other Measures

Good Offices, Conciliation and Mediation

Unlike consultation in which “a complainant has the power to force a respondent to reply and
consult or face a panel,” good offices, conciliation and mediation “are undertaken voluntarily if
the parties to the dispute so agree.” No requirements on form, time, or procedure for them exist.
Any party may initiate or terminate them at any time. The complaining party may request the
formation of the panel,” if the parties to the dispute jointly consider that the good offices,
conciliation or mediation process has failed to settle the dispute.” Thus the DSU recognized that
what was important was that the nations involved in a dispute come to a workable understanding
on how to proceed and that sometimes the formal WTO dispute resolution process would not be
the best way to find such an accord. Still, no nation could simply ignore its obligations under
international trade agreements without taking the risk that a WTO panel would take note of its
behaviour.
This may take place during any stage of dispute settlement system.
Arbitration
Members may seek arbitration within the WTO as an alternative means of dispute settlement to
facilitate the solution of certain disputes that concern issues that are clearly defined by both
parties.”Those parties must reach a mutual agreement to arbitration and the procedures to be
followed. Agreed arbitration must be notified to all members prior to the beginning of the
arbitration process. Third parties may become a party to the arbitration “only upon the agreement
of the parties that have agreed to have recourse to arbitration.” The parties to the proceeding
must agree to abide by the arbitration award. “Arbitration awards shall be notified to the DSB
and the Council or Committee of any relevant agreement where any member may raise any point
relating thereto.”
5.WTO Agreements – GATT, GATS, and TRIPS

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was established in 1947. In 1995, GATT was replaced
by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). As far as the old system or GATT was concerned,
there were two GATTS: GATT, the organisation, and GATT, the agreement. The second one
refers to the agreement between different governments setting out the rules for trade. GATT, the
organisation, has been replaced by the establishment of the WTO. GATT, the agreement,
however, exists along with the additional WTO new agreements, viz.
● General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), and
● General Agreements on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS).
It is, thus, clear that the WTO Agreements cover goods, services and intellectual property.

The three agreements establishing the WTO are:

1. GATT,
2. GATS, and
3. TRIPS
GATT
GATT is related to increasing market access by reducing various trade barriers operating in
different countries. The dismantling of trade restrictions was to be achieved by the reduction in
tariff rates, reductions in non-tariff support in agriculture, abolition of voluntary export restraints
or phasing out the Multi-fibre Arrangement (MFA), cut in subsidies, etc.
GATS

Multilaterally agreed and legally enforceable rules and disciplines relating to trade in services are
covered by General Agreement on Trade in Services. It envisages free trade in services, like
banking, insurance, hotels, construction, etc., so as to promote growth in the developed countries
by providing larger markets and in the developing countries through the transfer of technologies
from the developed countries. GATS is more comprehensive in coverage than GATT. Trade in
services is defined as covering more than a cross-border exchange of a service and includes also
consumer movements and factor flows (Investment and labor).
As a result of this agreement, access of service personnel into markets of member countries will
henceforth be possible on a non-discriminatory basis under the transparent and rule-based
system. Under the agreement, service sector would be placed under most favored nation (MFN)
obligations that prevent countries from discriminating among different nations in respect of
services.
TRIPS

The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an

international legal agreement between all the member nations of the World Trade Organization
(WTO). It sets down minimum standards for the regulation by national governments of many
forms of intellectual property (IP) as applied to nationals of other WTO member nations. TRIPS
was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) in 1994 and is administered by the WTO.
The TRIPS agreement introduced intellectual property law into the international trading system
for the first time and remains the most comprehensive international agreement on intellectual
property to date. As per the TRIPs provisions, the member countries are required to prepare the
necessary legal framework spelling out the scope and standards of protection for rights in regard
to intellectual property. Or in other words, the member countries have to adopt TRIPs provisions
in their domestic intellectual property legislations like Patent Act, Copyright Act etc.
WTO advocates necessary amendments to national IPR laws to accommodate the TRIPs
provisions. TRIPs agreement is an effort to bring national legislation under common
international rules. An important feature of TRIPs is that it is more specific and hard on ‘patents’
-the most important form of intellectual property. Patents should be available for any invention,
whether products or processes, in all fields of technology provided they are new, involve an
inventive step and capable of industrial application. Patents should be available and patent rights
enjoyable without discrimination. In the case of plant rights, geographical indications etc.,
members can adopt a sui-generis (own designed) IPR regime.
WTO gives following areas of intellectual property – copyright and related rights, trademarks,
protection of undisclosed information (trade secrets), geographical indications, industrial
designs, integrated circuits, patents, and control of anti-competitive practices in contractual
licenses. Signing TRIPs means countries have to modify their Patent Act, Copy Right Act, Trade
Mark Act etc., in accordance with the provisions of the TRIPs. In India, the government has
made a major amendment to the 1970 Patent Act in 2005 to accommodate the TRIPs provisions.
In 2010, the Copyright Act was amended and enforced from 2012. Other legislations with
respect to Industrial designs also have been made.

6.​Differences between GATT and WTO:

The points given below explain the difference between GATT and WTO in detail:
1. GATT was ad-hoc and provisional. The WTO and its agreement are permanent with
WTO having a sound legal basis because members have ratified the WTO agreements.
2. GATT refers to an international multilateral treaty to promote international trade and
remove cross-country trade barriers. On the contrary, WTO is a global body, which
 superseded GATT and deals with the rules of international trade between member
nations.
3. While GATT is a simple agreement, there is no institutional existence, but have a small
secretariat. Conversely, WTO is a permanent institution along with a secretariat.
4. The participating nations are called as contracting parties in GATT, whereas for WTO,
they are called as member nations.
5. The grandfather clause in the Protocol of Provisional Application in GATT 1947 has not
been carried forward to WTO. WTO contains an improved version of original GATT
rules-GATT Rules 1994.
6. GATT commitments are provisional in nature, which after 47 years the government can
make a choice to treat it as a permanent commitment or not. On the other hand, WTO
commitments are permanent, since the very beginning.
7. The scope of WTO is wider than that of GATT in the sense that the rules of GATT are
applied only when the trade is made in goods. As opposed to, WTO whose rules are
applicable to services and aspects of intellectual property along with the goods.
8. GATT agreement is primarily multilateral, but the plurilateral agreement is added to it
later. In contrast, WTO agreements are purely multilateral.
9. The domestic legislation is allowed to continue in GATT, while the same is not possible
in the case of WTO.
10. The dispute settlement system of GATT was slower, less automatic and susceptible to
blockages. Unlike WTO, whose dispute settlement system is very effective.

7. ​Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF) and Free on Board (FOB) | CIF and FOB Contracts

Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF) and Free on Board (FOB) are international shipping
agreements used in the transportation of goods between a buyer and a seller. They are among the
most common of the 12 international commerce terms (INCOTERMS) established by the
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in 1936. The specific definitions vary somewhat in
every country, but in general, both contracts specify origin and destination information that is
used to determine where liability officially begins and ends, and outline the responsibilities of
buyers to sellers as well as sellers to buyers. In CIF, the buyer should note that seller is required
to obtain insurance on minimum cover.

CIF and FOB mainly differ in who assumes responsibility for the

goods during transit.

In CIF agreements, insurance and other costs are assumed by the seller, with liability and costs
associated with successful transit paid by the seller up until the goods are received by the buyer.
The responsibilities of the seller include transporting the goods to the nearest port, loading them
on a vessel and paying for the insurance and freight. In some agreements, goods are not
considered to be delivered until they are actually in the buyer’s possession; in others, the goods
are considered delivered (and the buyer’s responsibility) once they reach the port of destination.

FOB contracts relieve the seller of responsibility once the goods

are shipped.

After the goods have been loaded – technically, “passed the ship’s rail,” – they are considered to
be delivered into the control of the buyer. When the voyage begins, the buyer then assumes all
liability. The buyer can, therefore, negotiate a cheaper price for the freight and insurance with a
forwarder of his or her choice. In fact, some international traders seek to maximize their profits
by buying F.O.B and selling CIF. It is to be noted that F.O.B clause is frequently taken as a basis
for the calculation of the goods sold and not as a term defining the method of delivery.
Each agreement has particular advantages and drawbacks for

both parties.

While sellers often prefer F.O.B and buyers prefer CIF, some trade agreements find one method
more convenient for both parties. A seller with expertise in local customs that the buyer lacks
would likely assume CIF responsibility to encourage the buyer to accept a deal, for example.
Smaller companies may prefer the larger party to assume liability, as this can result in lower
costs. Some companies also have special access through customs, document freight charges
when calculating taxation, and other needs that necessitate a particular shipping agreement.
8.FOREIGN AWARD-
The Calcutta High Court in Case Serajuddin v. Michael Golodetz, laid down the necessary
conditions relations relating to term ‘foreign arbitration’ or essential elements of a foreign
arbitration, resulting into the foreign arbitral award -these are as following points;-
a. Arbitration should have been held in foreign lands;
b. by foreign arbiter(s);
c. Arbitration by applying foreign laws;&
d. As a party foreign national is involved.
In the instant case since the case was decided on the basis of American Arbitration Law, on
foreign land involving a foreign party under a foreign arbitration, it was held to be a foreign
arbitration.
Enforcement of the award is important, if not more than, a favorable award. Arbitration awards
less value unless it can be speedy and effectively enforced and another scene of enforceability of
foreign awards in India. The 1996 Act provides a summary mechanism for the enforcement of
awards classified as foreign awards. It must be noted that only awards made under the New York
Convention of 1960 or the Geneva Convention of 1927 can be classified as foreign awards. A
foreign award has been defined under the 1996 Act as an arbitral award on differences between
persons arising out of legal relationships, whether contractual or not. Such an award must also be
considered as commercial under the law in force in India, made on or after 11 October 1960.
A foreign award can also be one - in pursuance of an agreement in writing for arbitration to
which the Convention set forth in the First Schedule applies, or in territories where the Central
Government is satisfied that reciprocal provisions have been made public by notification in the
official gazette. Under Section 44, an arbitral award is a foreign award only if it is made in
pursuance of an agreement to which the New York Convention applies, or if it is made in a
territory to which the New York Convention applies. International commercial arbitration, on the
other hand, applies only to agreements to which any other international or bilateral treaty would
apply.
The Supreme Court of India has held that the party holding a foreign award can apply for
enforcement of it. Before taking further steps, however, the court in charge of execution of the
award has to proceed in accordance with sections 47 to 49. The Party seeking enforcement of the
foreign awards can enforce the same by filing only one proceeding in the court.
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 has divided itself into two parts. The First part
deals with Arbitration that is conducted in India and its enforcement. The Second part provides
for arbitration conducted in a Foreign Country and enforcement of such foreign awards.

The courts in India first considered the applicability of Part I of the act to arbitration taking place
outside India in Bhatia International v Bulk Trading. The Supreme Court held that Part I would
apply to all arbitrations and to all proceedings relating thereto, where such arbitration is held in
India. For international commercial arbitration, it was held that Part I would still apply unless the
parties by agreement, whether express or implied, had excluded all or any of the provisions
included therein.

The Supreme Court subsequently reiterated its decision in Bhatia International in Venture Global
Engineering v Satyam Computers Services. This case dealt with an arbitration award made in
England through an arbitral process conducted by the London Court of International Arbitration.
The Supreme Court held that Part I would apply to such an arbitral award. Consequently, the
courts in India would have jurisdiction under both Section 9 and Section 34 of the act. Hence, an
Indian court could entertain a challenge to the validity of such an arbitral award. Since the
judgments in Bhatia International and Venture Global, the Indian courts have had to apply the
rationale detailed therein in various other cases. However, it increasingly became accepted that
the judgment in Bhatia International was interventionist in nature and not aligned with the spirit
of party autonomy that is core to the arbitral process.

In September 2012 in Bharat Aluminium Company (BALCO) v Kaiser Aluminium Technical

Services Inc. the Supreme Court reconsidered its earlier controversial ruling in Bhatia
International concerning applicability of Part I to arbitrations that are held outside India. The
court held that the rationale laid down in Bhatia International, and followed in Venture Global,
was not in line with the act. Accordingly, it overruled these earlier judgments and held that Part I
would not apply to arbitrations held outside India. The Supreme Court stated that Part I applies
to only those arbitrations that are held within India – the crucial test for determining whether Part
I is applicable is whether the seat of arbitration is in India. Accordingly, it was held that Indian
courts will have no jurisdiction to make Part I of the act applicable to an arbitral award made
outside India. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the courts of the country that is the
seat of arbitration and those of the country whose law is chosen by the parties will have
concurrent jurisdiction over any court proceedings in relation to such arbitral process. It was held
that the courts of only the country in which the seat of arbitration is located have jurisdiction to
entertain any matter relating to the arbitration. Only in the absence of a choice of seat of
arbitration will the country whose law is chosen by the parties have jurisdiction to entertain
arbitration proceedings.
It was also clarified that since Part I of the act does not apply to arbitrations held outside India,
provisions such as those for interim relief under Section 9 would also not apply to arbitrations
held outside India. Consequently, if the seat of arbitration is located outside India, the parties
would not be free to institute civil suits in India for obtaining interim relief. The argument that in
such a scenario the parties would be left without a remedy for interim measures was rejected by
the Supreme Court, as the parties were free to seek appropriate remedies in their chosen
jurisdiction.