Justice S S NIjjar, who had reserved his judgement on the matter, said both, the Centre and RIL provided the list of eminent foreign arbitrators but he preferred to do his own survey for maintaining neutrality and chose the name of Justice Spigelman.
“However, given the sharp difference of opinion between the two arbitrators, I deem it appropriate to perform the task of appointing the third arbitrator in this Court itself. Therefore, I had requested the learned senior counsel for the parties to supply a list of eminent individuals one of whom could be appointed as the third arbitrator.
“Although two lists have been duly supplied by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it would be appropriate if an individual not named by any of the parties is appointed as the third arbitrator. I have discretely conducted a survey to find a suitable third arbitrator who is not a National of any of the parties involved in the dispute,” Justice Nijjar said.
He rejected the apprehension expressed by the Centre that if a foreign national is appointed as a third arbitrator, the Tribunal would be at a disadvantage as all applicable laws are Indian.
Latest India News
