India now a supportive cousin, not an interventionist uncle in global arbitration: CJI BR Gavai

India’s approach to arbitration has shifted from one of scepticism to support, Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai said during a fireside chat at the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) Symposium in London held on June 4..Speaking with LCIA Director Kevin Nash and Stewart Disputes Partner Sherina Petit, CJI Gavai said that the Indian judiciary has evolved significantly in its engagement with arbitration.“India has moved from ‘interventionist uncle’ to ‘supportive elder cousin’ in the global arbitration family.”.The session was part of LCIA’s efforts to engage with global judicial leaders on the future of international arbitration, with India’s top judge offering a candid reflection on the country’s evolving role..In his speech, CJI Gavai said that courts in India are increasingly aligned with global standards, citing a series of decisions that reflect this shift. These included the Constitution Bench ruling in CORE v. ECI-SPIC SMO MCML (2024), which invalidated unilateral appointment clauses, and Gayatri Balasamy (2025), which reiterated that courts cannot modify the substance of arbitral awards.“Procedure is no longer being treated as a weapon, but a tool,” CJI Gavai said, referring to the judiciary’s preference for efficiency and substance over technical objections. He also pointed to the Delhi High Court’s endorsement of third-party funding and the Supreme Court’s limited intervention at the Section 11 stage of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, as seen in Krish Spinning (2024).“As long as there is no dispute about the existence of the arbitration clause...courts must appoint an arbitral tribunal,” he said..On the continued debate between ad hoc and institutional arbitration in India, CJI Gavai said that we have yet to cover ground as regards the latter. While ad hoc arbitration remains dominant due to its familiarity, Indian institutions like the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and the India International Arbitration Centre (IIAC) are beginning to offer structured processes, transparent fee models and proactive case management, he said.“To tip the scales, domestic arbitral institutions in India need more than just buildings and logos. They need trust, track record, and teeth – like many international institutions such as yours (LCIA). I firmly believe that Indian institutions are actively rising to the challenge.”DIAC’s scrutiny committee, he said, is one example of how institutions are stepping up..CJI Gavai noted that institutional credibility would be strengthened if government departments and public sector enterprises (PSUs) began including institutional arbitration clauses in contracts..Reflecting on the accessibility of arbitration across India, CJI Gavai emphasised the need to reach commercial actors beyond metropolitan areas. Drawing from his own early practice in Nagpur, he said:“Arbitration, to truly serve India, must reflect the country’s diversity,” he said, recalling his own experience starting out in Nagpur.He emphasised that advancements such as virtual hearings, localised case management and technological outreach have made it possible to extend arbitration beyond Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru.“With the right institutional support and judicial encouragement, arbitration can be embedded across the country’s commercial heartland,” he added..On interim measures, CJI Gavai called for judicial restraint, warning against using interim relief as a substitute for arbitration itself:"Interim relief is meant to preserve the efficacy of arbitration - not to create a mini-trial before the main event. The court’s role here is more like a scaffolding: necessary at the early stage, but not meant to stay up forever. Courts should only act as safety nets and not parallel tracks. This would serve the purpose without compromising arbitration’s core promise of autonomy and efficiency.".He noted that courts are increasingly deferring to the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals, intervening only in cases of urgency or irreparable harm.Discussing the finality of arbitral awards, CJI Gavai said that the court's role is limited to minor corrections such as clerical errors or statutory interest adjustments. Referring to the Gayatri Balasamy ruling, he remarked:“The Constitution Bench has given courts a measured spice box, not a free hand with the masala.”.On building public trust in arbitral institutions, he said that procedural integrity remains key:“Trust in institutions, like good coffee, takes time to brew — but one bad cup, and people go back to tea.”He added that parties are not looking for glamour but want efficiency, neutrality, and finality..Asked about common misconceptions foreign audiences may have about the Indian judiciary, CJI Gavai turned the question around, inviting reflection from the audience instead. “That’s a great question – but perhaps the better one is: what do you think is the one thing foreign audiences misunderstand about the Indian judiciary?” he asked.Rather than asserting a fixed narrative, he emphasised the importance of dialogue and perception-building. “Sometimes the best way to correct a misconception is to first know which one you are working with.”.Concluding the conversation, CJI Gavai said that India is not simply seeking inclusion in global arbitration circles:“India is eyeing a seat at the cool kids’ table… and this time, it’s not just asking for a seat — it’s bringing its own chair.”CJI Gavai also extended an invitation to the international arbitration community to participate in the upcoming Delhi Arbitration Week scheduled for September this year.