Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Detailed Explanation with Case Law
1. What is Section 8 about?
Section 8 deals with the power of judicial authorities to refer parties to arbitration if there is an existing arbitration agreement.
It is designed to ensure that disputes covered by an arbitration agreement are resolved through arbitration and not through courts, thus respecting the parties' contractual intention.
2. Text of Section 8 (simplified):
If a party to an arbitration agreement files a suit or proceedings in a court regarding a dispute covered by the arbitration agreement, the court must refer the parties to arbitration if the other party applies for it, unless the court finds that the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative, or incapable of being performed.
3. Key Elements of Section 8:
Existence of an arbitration agreement: There must be a valid arbitration clause or agreement.
Dispute falling under arbitration agreement: The dispute in the suit should be covered by the arbitration clause.
Application by the party: The respondent to the suit must apply for reference to arbitration.
Court's limited role: The court’s role is limited to verifying the existence and validity of the arbitration agreement, not to delve into the merits of the dispute.
Mandatory referral: If the arbitration agreement is valid and applicable, the court has no discretion but to refer the dispute to arbitration.
4. Purpose of Section 8:
To reduce judicial interference in arbitration matters.
To uphold the autonomy of the arbitration agreement.
To promote speedy dispute resolution outside courts.
5. Important Case Law on Section 8:
a) Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., (2012) 9 SCC 552
The Supreme Court clarified that the court should refer the parties to arbitration under Section 8 if a valid arbitration agreement exists, without examining the merits.
The court may look into validity, existence, and applicability of the arbitration clause, but not the substance of the dispute.
This judgment marked a pro-arbitration approach, reducing court interference.
b) Chloro Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., (2013) 1 SCC 641
The Supreme Court held that the arbitral tribunal, not the court, is the appropriate authority to decide the validity of the arbitration agreement.
The court should not go into merits or other complex questions while deciding whether to refer to arbitration.
Courts must take a pro-arbitration stance and minimize delays.
c) M/s. Union of India v. M/s. McDonnell Douglas Corporation, AIR 1993 SC 113
Emphasized that existence of arbitration agreement should be respected, and disputes should be referred to arbitration if the agreement covers the dispute.
d) Venture Global Engineering v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd., (2010) 4 SCC 722
Affirmed that once an arbitration agreement is established, courts must refer parties to arbitration.
6. Practical Application of Section 8:
When a party files a suit for a dispute that has an arbitration clause, the opposite party can file an application under Section 8 to get the suit stayed and referred to arbitration.
The court first checks whether:
An arbitration agreement exists,
The dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement,
The arbitration agreement is not null or invalid.
If these are met, the court refers the dispute to arbitration.
7. Summary Table
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Purpose | Refer disputes to arbitration if arbitration agreement exists |
| Trigger | Suit filed in court relating to dispute covered by arbitration |
| Court's Role | Check existence and validity of arbitration agreement only |
| Court's Power | Must refer dispute to arbitration if agreement is valid |
| Key Case Law | Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium; Chloro Controls case |
8. Conclusion:
Section 8 enforces the binding nature of arbitration agreements by requiring courts to refer parties to arbitration.
Courts cannot entertain suits on disputes covered by arbitration agreements, thereby promoting speedy and efficient dispute resolution.
The Supreme Court’s judgments have emphasized a pro-arbitration approach, limiting judicial interference and ensuring respect for parties’ agreements.
RELATED Blog
0 comments