Latest news with #ArbitrationAct
The Journal
a day ago
- Business
- The Journal
Scrutiny of laws to facilitate Ireland's trade deal with Canada scrapped after US tariffs
LAWS TO FACILITATE a trade deal between Ireland, Canada and other EU member states will not be scrutinised following the announcement that a 15% tariff will be placed on Irish goods exported to the US . The contentious EU-Canada trade agreement, known as CETA, is to be ratified after politicians on the Oireachtas foreign affairs committee have waived their right to investigate the potential outcomes and consequences of the bill. Amendments to the Arbitration Act, which dictates the legality of, and set petametres around, civil lawsuits that can be taken in Ireland, were due to be examined in order to facilitate the creation of a free-trade zone between Europe and Canada. Ten member states previously rejected the deal and declined to ratify it , and the Irish Supreme Court previously said that CETA would be unconstitutional over clauses that could allow foreign investors to sue the state over any potential breaches. Trade minister and Tánaiste Simon Harris announced today that he intends to bring forward and accelerate the updates to the Arbitration Act, which will allow for CETA to be ratified without any constitutional breaches. Advertisement Government previously earmarked the expedited implementation of the deal in May , following crunch talks over Ireland's challenges with economic competitiveness and the threat of harsh US tariffs. The decision to scrap pre-legislative scrutiny, when politicians invite experts to discuss the potential consequences and outcomes of new laws, was welcomed by Harris. He said that the deal will 'open the door to one of the world's largest economies' and allow Irish firms, farmers and exports to have new opportunities. He claimed that Irish exports to Canada have increased 'fourfold' since its framework was agreed. 'This is about more trade, more jobs, and more stability for Ireland,' Harris added. Two members of the foreign affairs committee, Senators Patricia Stephenson and Alice Mary Higgins, have said they are alarmed by the decision. Stephenson said it was shameful that the government would ignore the Supreme Court decision. 'This is a disgraceful decision given the fraught legal background of this issue and the hugely controversial investor court system that ratification of CETA will usher in,' the Social Democrats senator said. Independent Senator Higgins, who has been a long-time critic of the trade deal, said the untested bill could have 'significant implications for our sovereignty', which could expose Ireland to millions 'or even billions' in potential claims. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Mint
6 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Supreme Court dismisses Maran's plea seeking ₹1,323 crore damages from SpiceJet
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea filed by Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways challenging a Delhi High Court order that had rejected their claim seeking ₹ 1,323 crore in damages from SpiceJet. A bench of Justices P. S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar refused to interfere with the high court's decision. SpiceJet shares shot up nearly 7% in noon trading post the apex court's decision, and we at ₹ 40.71 apiece on BSE. The Sensex was up 0.42%. Maran and KAL Airways had challenged the Delhi High Court's 23 May order that had dismissed their appeals due to delays. The division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul had refused to condone a 55-day delay in filing and a 226-day delay in re-filing their appeals, calling their conduct a 'calculated gamble' and accusing them of deliberately concealing information from the court and SpiceJet. Condonation of delay refers to seeking the court's permission to file a case or appeal after the legal deadline has lapsed. Under the Limitation Act, parties typically have 90 days to file an appeal from a single judge's decision to a division bench. If they miss this deadline, they must explain the delay to seek condonation, which the Delhi High Court did not accept in this case. In 2015, Maran and KAL Airways transferred their entire stake in SpiceJet to Ajay Singh for a nominal ₹ 2 amid a financial crisis that had nearly shut the airline. As part of the deal, Singh, who became SpiceJet's chairman and managing director, took over liabilities worth ₹ 1,500 crore. Maran and KAL Airways had also paid ₹ 679 crore to SpiceJet for issuing convertible warrants and preference shares. However, these were never issued under Singh's management, prompting Maran to approach the Delhi High Court in 2017 seeking a refund. In July 2018, an arbitration panel of three retired Supreme Court judges rejected Maran's claim for ₹ 1,323 crore in damages but ordered a refund of ₹ 579 crore plus interest. Both sides challenged parts of this award under the Arbitration Act in the Delhi High Court. In 2023, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh upheld the arbitral award, directing SpiceJet and Singh to refund ₹ 308 crore for warrants and ₹ 270 crore for preference shares, along with applicable interest. SpiceJet challenged this ruling before a division bench. In May 2024, the division bench granted relief to SpiceJet by remanding the case to the single judge for fresh consideration, putting the ₹ 270 crore refund on hold. Maran and KAL Airways approached the Supreme Court against this remand decision, but their plea was dismissed in July 2024. They then refiled their long-pending appeals against the single judge's 2023 order, leading to the high court division bench's May 2025 dismissal due to delays. In a stock exchange filing on 26 May, SpiceJet welcomed the high court's decision.
Mint
7 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Supreme Court dismisses Maran's plea seeking ₹1,323 crore damages from SpiceJet
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea filed by Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways challenging a Delhi High Court order that had rejected their claim seeking ₹ 1,323 crore in damages from SpiceJet. A bench of Justices P. S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar refused to interfere with the high court's decision. Maran and KAL Airways had challenged the Delhi High Court's 23 May order that had dismissed their appeals due to delays. The division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul had refused to condone a 55-day delay in filing and a 226-day delay in re-filing their appeals, calling their conduct a 'calculated gamble' and accusing them of deliberately concealing information from the court and SpiceJet. Condonation of delay refers to seeking the court's permission to file a case or appeal after the legal deadline has lapsed. Under the Limitation Act, parties typically have 90 days to file an appeal from a single judge's decision to a division bench. If they miss this deadline, they must explain the delay to seek condonation, which the Delhi High Court did not accept in this case. In 2015, Maran and KAL Airways transferred their entire stake in SpiceJet to Ajay Singh for a nominal ₹ 2 amid a financial crisis that had nearly shut the airline. As part of the deal, Singh, who became SpiceJet's chairman and managing director, took over liabilities worth ₹ 1,500 crore. Maran and KAL Airways had also paid ₹ 679 crore to SpiceJet for issuing convertible warrants and preference shares. However, these were never issued under Singh's management, prompting Maran to approach the Delhi High Court in 2017 seeking a refund. In July 2018, an arbitration panel of three retired Supreme Court judges rejected Maran's claim for ₹ 1,323 crore in damages but ordered a refund of ₹ 579 crore plus interest. Both sides challenged parts of this award under the Arbitration Act in the Delhi High Court. In 2023, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh upheld the arbitral award, directing SpiceJet and Singh to refund ₹ 308 crore for warrants and ₹ 270 crore for preference shares, along with applicable interest. SpiceJet challenged this ruling before a division bench. In May 2024, the division bench granted relief to SpiceJet by remanding the case to the single judge for fresh consideration, putting the ₹ 270 crore refund on hold. Maran and KAL Airways approached the Supreme Court against this remand decision, but their plea was dismissed in July 2024. They then refiled their long-pending appeals against the single judge's 2023 order, leading to the high court division bench's May 2025 dismissal due to delays. In a stock exchange filing on 26 May, SpiceJet welcomed the high court's decision. 'These claims were thoroughly examined and rejected by a panel of three retired Supreme Court judges. KAL Airways and Kalanithi Maran then appealed to the single judge bench of the Delhi High Court seeking the same amount in damages, which was also rejected by the court,' the airline said.
Mint
04-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Kalanithi Maran moves SC after Delhi HC rejects ₹1,323 crore claim against SpiceJet
New Delhi: Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways have moved the Supreme Court challenging a Delhi high court order that dismissed their plea seeking ₹ 1,323 crore in damages from SpiceJet in a dispute that dates back to 2015. On Friday, a vacation bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan agreed to hear their petitions on 18 July. Maran and KAL Airways have challenged the Delhi high court's 23 May order that dismissed their appeals due to delays. A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul refused to condone a 55-day delay in filing and a 226-day delay in re-filing their appeals, calling their actions a 'calculated gamble' and accusing them of deliberately concealing information from the court and SpiceJet. It is to be noted that condonation of delay means seeking the court's permission to file a case or appeal after the legal deadline has passed. Under the Limitation Act, parties usually get 90 days to file an appeal from a single judge's decision to a division bench. If they miss this deadline, they must explain the reasons for the delay and seek condonation. In this case, the court did not accept their explanation. This legal battle dates back to 2015, when Maran and KAL Airways transferred their entire stake in SpiceJet to Ajay Singh for a nominal ₹ 2 amid a financial crisis that had nearly shut down the airline. As part of the deal, Singh took over liabilities worth ₹ 1,500 crore. Maran and KAL Airways had also paid ₹ 679 crore to SpiceJet for issuing convertible warrants and preference shares. However, these were never issued under Singh's management, prompting Maran to approach the Delhi high court in 2017 for a refund. In July 2018, an arbitration panel of three retired Supreme Court judges rejected Maran's claim for ₹ 1,323 crore in damages but ordered a refund of ₹ 579 crore plus interest. Both sides challenged parts of this award under the Arbitration Act in the high court. In 2023, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh of the Delhi high court upheld the arbitral award, ordering SpiceJet and Singh to refund ₹ 308 crore for warrants and ₹ 270 crore for preference shares, along with applicable interest. SpiceJet then challenged this ruling before the division bench. In May 2024, the division bench gave relief to SpiceJet by sending the case back to a single judge for fresh consideration, putting the ₹ 270 crore refund on hold. Maran and KAL Airways approached the Supreme Court against this decision to remand the case, but their plea was dismissed in July 2024. Soon after, they refiled their long-pending appeals against the single judge's 2023 order, leading to the high court division bench's May 2025 dismissal due to delays.
Mint
04-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Kalanithi Maran moves SC after Delhi HC rejects ₹1,323 crore claim against SpiceJet
New Delhi: Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways have moved the Supreme Court challenging a Delhi high court order that dismissed their plea seeking ₹ 1,323 crore in damages from SpiceJet in a dispute that dates back to 2015. On Friday, a vacation bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan agreed to hear their petitions on 18 July. Maran and KAL Airways have challenged the Delhi high court's 23 May order that dismissed their appeals due to delays. A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul refused to condone a 55-day delay in filing and a 226-day delay in re-filing their appeals, calling their actions a 'calculated gamble' and accusing them of deliberately concealing information from the court and SpiceJet. It is to be noted that condonation of delay means seeking the court's permission to file a case or appeal after the legal deadline has passed. Under the Limitation Act, parties usually get 90 days to file an appeal from a single judge's decision to a division bench. If they miss this deadline, they must explain the reasons for the delay and seek condonation. In this case, the court did not accept their explanation. This legal battle dates back to 2015, when Maran and KAL Airways transferred their entire stake in SpiceJet to Ajay Singh for a nominal ₹ 2 amid a financial crisis that had nearly shut down the airline. As part of the deal, Singh took over liabilities worth ₹ 1,500 crore. Maran and KAL Airways had also paid ₹ 679 crore to SpiceJet for issuing convertible warrants and preference shares. However, these were never issued under Singh's management, prompting Maran to approach the Delhi high court in 2017 for a refund. In July 2018, an arbitration panel of three retired Supreme Court judges rejected Maran's claim for ₹ 1,323 crore in damages but ordered a refund of ₹ 579 crore plus interest. Both sides challenged parts of this award under the Arbitration Act in the high court. In 2023, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh of the Delhi high court upheld the arbitral award, ordering SpiceJet and Singh to refund ₹ 308 crore for warrants and ₹ 270 crore for preference shares, along with applicable interest. SpiceJet then challenged this ruling before the division bench. In May 2024, the division bench gave relief to SpiceJet by sending the case back to a single judge for fresh consideration, putting the ₹ 270 crore refund on hold. Maran and KAL Airways approached the Supreme Court against this decision to remand the case, but their plea was dismissed in July 2024. Soon after, they refiled their long-pending appeals against the single judge's 2023 order, leading to the high court division bench's May 2025 dismissal due to delays. In a stock exchange filing on 26 May, SpiceJet welcomed the high court's decision. 'These claims were thoroughly examined and rejected by a panel of three retired Supreme Court judges. KAL Airways and Kalanithi Maran then appealed to the single judge bench of the Delhi High Court seeking the same amount in damages, which was also rejected by the court.'
