header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Third-party funding & the evolution of arbitration in India

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
20 October 2023 / Saurabh Bhagotra
Issue: 8045 / Categories: Features , Profession , International , ADR , Arbitration
printer mail-detail
143247
Could India match or even exceed Singapore’s rise in the arbitration space? Saurabh Bhagotra investigates
  • Reports on significance of Tomorrow Sales Agency to the arbitration landscape in India.
  • India is increasingly attractive as a hub for international arbitration and could be a future challenger to Singapore and London.

In the recent case of Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Limited v SBS Holdings, Inc and Ors 2023 DHC 3830-DB, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court ruled that those who provide third-party funding are not liable to pay adverse awards in arbitration claims. This is a landmark ruling which will support the landscape of the future of arbitration in India, and is indicative of a shift in the Indian legal system to become more conducive to arbitration and mediation. With India expected to overtake the US in the size of its economy by 2075, this will likely give India a high global standing.

Progress of arbitration in India

Arbitration is now a preferred method

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur under scrutiny
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
NLJ this week: Does dishonesty always mean strike-off?
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
NLJ this week: Potanin, prenups & privacy
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
NLJ this week: Malaysia’s arbitration overhaul
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
NLJ this week: Greed but no fraud in £1.4bn SKAT case
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll