China overtakes India at ICC as local ‘myths’ on arbitration continue to dog institutional: ICC

Comparative graph of ICC case numbers
Comparative graph of ICC case numbers
India slipped from being one of the five countries with the highest number of International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitrations in 2012, to bringing only the 10th highest number of ICC arbitrations in 2014, according to data from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), where India lost its four-year lead on China after 2012.

ICC Arbitration & ADR Asia director Sylvia Tee told Legally India that Chinese parties had recently overtaken Indian parties in terms of the total number of cases at the ICC now because the Chinese government encouraged institutionalised arbitration and there is an increase in awareness about institutional arbitration even in mainland China, in contrast to India’s continuing preference for ad-hoc arbitration.

She said:

It is difficult to speculate about the fluctuations in the number of ICC cases in these two jurisdictions over the years as it could be linked to various external factors including the overall number of disputes in these two jurisdictions, early settlement of disputes, preference for the courts, etc.

However, what is clear is that the number of Mainland Chinese parties involved in ICC cases have shot up in the past 2 years compared to India.

In 2014 Indian parties brought only 60 cases before the ICC, while Chinese parties brought 73.

In 2013 Indian parties brought 55 cases while the Chinese brought 86.

China was the sixth-ranked country at the ICC in terms of the total number of cases in 2014. The USA, France, Brazil, Germany and Italy were ahead of China in those rankings.

Tee said that a trend similar to China could develop in India by “breaking myths” that surround institutionalised arbitration and educating the local community about the economic and other benefits of institutionalised arbitration.

She explained that at the ICC only two per cent of the total arbitration cost went to the institution, 18 per cent to the arbitrator and the rest of the expenses were the fees of the lawyers the parties instruct.

The ICC’s case management teams (seven in all) assist parties, arbitrators and counsel with the ICC’s rules and brief the court on its decisions, explained ICC deputy counsel Abhinav Bhushan.

The ICC competes primarily with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).

The SIAC in 2013 had seen Indian arbitrations grow by 300 per cent to 85 cases, with Indian parties then making up the single largest nationality at SIAC.

Comments

Guest 30 Oct 2015, 11:09
+3 -2
I blame Modi for this slippage. Where are achche din? this govt is only banning......

I have no award to return but will do so when u get one, in retrospect....
#2RsPpl 1 Nov 2015, 15:46
+1 -1
As a country we need to develop our systems for enforcement of contracts and arbitration awards. As China has Hong Kong, United Kingdom has Guernsey / British Virgin Islands, USA has Delaware; we also need to have a separate area where there can easy rules for parking of funds and establishing a corporation (corporate entity). That way we may reduce the usage of Mauritius route and have all the funds and companies in a place where there is absolute control of the Indian sovereign. We may consider developing Andaman or Puducherry in these lines and can set up our own arbitration centres like SIAC/HKIAC (the proxy that we have is the arbitrations happening at India Habitat Centre which is unfortunately not sufficient). If we want to develop and compete with China, US and Europe we need to act fast. The recent changes brought in by through the ordinance route (changes in Arbitration & Conciliation Act and establishment of designated Commercial Courts) are steps in the right direction and I hope the trend continues.
Amazing! 5 Nov 2015, 07:24
+0 -1
I concur with your thoughts!
Hell no 5 Nov 2015, 12:59
+0 -2
While I agree with your idea, we definitely cannot have Andamans as the "easy jurisdiction"! Connectivity issues will effectively kill the implementation. I guess the same goes for Puducherry.

If you want a city with a beach, lets go for Goa :P
#2RsPpl 6 Nov 2015, 12:18
+1 -0
Thank you for reading the comment and responding. Connectivity will develop (air, water, internet) when funds come. The whole idea is to have a place which is a small geographical area, really far from Delhi [the political capital (so that politicians are not that interested)] which can be developed into a futuristic township with foreign funds (and without bureaucratic hassles). A place in North-Eastern part of India may also do the job, but there are insurgency concerns and (on a lighter note) foreign fund managers generally prefer beach destinations.