India’s Arbitration Framework Has Advanced, But Key Obstacles Remain: CJI Surya Kant

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

India’s arbitration system has grown significantly, but Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said major hurdles still exist, especially in building trust, strengthening institutions, and ensuring a continuous pool of skilled arbitration professionals to support the country’s evolving dispute resolution framework.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said that although India’s arbitration framework has advanced significantly, important obstacles remain in fostering trust, expanding institutional capacity, and creating a steady pipeline of qualified arbitration professionals.

Referring to Gujarat Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel’s remarks at the same event where the CM highlighted institutional arbitration’s rising role within India’s legal architecture, especially for an industrial and technologically leading state like Gujarat the CJI observed that legislative and judicial developments have strengthened the system.

He said,

“I must acknowledge that India’s arbitration framework has by now matured considerably. Legislative reforms to the Arbitration Act have emphasised minimal judicial intervention, time-bound proceedings, and neutrality in appointments. Parallelly, judicial pronouncements have reinforced party autonomy and clarified doctrinal uncertainties,”

However, he cautioned that these advances do not eliminate the existing problems. Institutional arbitration still has less prominence than it should, with a large number of disputes proceeding via ad hoc methods.

Many institutional arbitration matters are also resolved outside India.

Pointing to gaps in trust, capacity, and trained personnel, he said,

“The question we must confront is not whether arbitration is viable, the question is whether our institutional arbitration and our institutions meant for that inspire sufficient trust to become the most preferred choice and destination,”

On trust, the CJI stressed that institutional arbitration delivers only when users have real confidence in it.

He said,

“Trust in the neutrality of arbitrator appointments, trust in procedural integrity, trust in the enforcement of awards- that trust is not built by rules on paper. It is built through consistent, transparent, and demonstrably fair practice over time,”

He urged an honest assessment of whether institutions have fully earned that trust and what more is required.

Capacity, he said, is the second issue. The number of institutional arbitrations in India is small compared with the country’s commercial dispute load. Many parties still opt for ad hoc arbitration or litigation because institutions have not clearly demonstrated their added value.

Strengthening infrastructure, internal arbitrator panels, case-management systems, and administrative effectiveness is a matter of relevance, not prestige, he added.

The third and perhaps most consequential challenge is professionalisation.

He remarked,

“Arbitration at its finest is a specialised discipline. It demands not only legal equity, but case management skills, sensitivity to commercial realities, and an understanding of what is genuinely is at stakes for the parties.”

He said,

“India must invest seriously in training arbitrators, and in developing a coherent pipeline of qualified arbitral professionals,”

He warned that without such investment, institutional growth could outstrip improvements in the quality of proceedings.

According to the CJI, progress requires institutional honesty measuring performance not by starting points but against the standards of leading arbitration seats worldwide and the legitimate expectations of parties seeking an efficient alternative to litigation.

The Gujarat High Court Arbitration Centre’s new facility includes 16 arbitration conference rooms, seven mediation rooms, and an online dispute-resolution platform for both international and domestic ADR.

GHAC also hosted a two-day conference titled “Institutional Arbitration at Crossroads: Challenges and the Way Forward,” convening arbitrators, advocates, and stakeholders to discuss key issues facing institutional arbitration.




Similar Posts