ABSTRACT:
The major argument against the doctrine of seperability is that it refutes the contractual approach to arbitration law. It has been criticized as it takes away the rights of the parties to move to court. Unfortunately, the effect of this doctrine is so wide that the practitioners fail to apply it in its limited context. Arbitration practitioners and scholars often venture out from its restricted context and apply it to generally separate the arbitration agreement from the carrier agreement. This has opened a Pandora’s box for habitual litigants to impede the determination of disputes. As a result of this, parties are burdened with mounting expenses, and the courts are also burdened with frivolous cases.
Authored by Divyanshi Gupta, Faculty of law, Lucknow University.