The dispute you are facing did not arise in one jurisdiction. An Indian joint venture partner has defaulted on obligations under an SHA governed by Singapore law. An Australian infrastructure company is disputing milestone payments under a construction contract with an Indian government entity. A GCC sovereign fund is seeking to enforce an arbitral award against an Indian promoter who has transferred assets across borders. The matter requires counsel who has appeared in the seat of arbitration, who understands the procedural culture of the institution, and who can simultaneously pursue enforcement through the Indian courts.
Goldschmidt Pallonji's arbitration practice is built on a foundation that no other Indian firm can replicate. Our founding directors include a SIAC panel arbitrator — someone who has sat as arbitrator in Singapore-seated proceedings, not merely appeared as counsel. This is the difference between knowing the rules of a game and having refereed it. When we advise you on how the tribunal is likely to approach a procedural application, or how to structure submissions for maximum impact before a particular institution, we are speaking from both sides of the table.
Our arbitration practice spans ad hoc and institutional proceedings under ICC, SIAC, LCIA, HKIAC, and DIAC rules, emergency arbitrator applications, interim relief before Indian courts under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, enforcement of foreign awards under Part II of the Act, and setting-aside applications under Section 34. We handle the full lifecycle — from the moment the dispute crystallises through to enforcement or satisfaction of the award — across all five of our international corridors.
End-to-end arbitration capability — from the first demand letter through award enforcement in India and internationally.
Full representation in proceedings under ICC, SIAC, LCIA, HKIAC, and DIAC rules. Drafting statements of case, managing document production, preparing witness statements, instructing experts, and oral advocacy before the tribunal.
Learn More →Emergency arbitrator applications under SIAC, ICC, and LCIA rules for urgent asset preservation. Parallel applications for interim measures before Indian courts under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.
Learn More →Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the New York Convention. Objections to enforcement, public policy challenges, and execution proceedings before the relevant High Court.
Learn More →Applications to set aside domestic arbitral awards under Section 34. Defending enforcement of awards against public policy challenges. Jurisdiction challenges, excess of mandate arguments, and procedural irregularity grounds before Indian courts.
Learn More →Deadlock resolution, minority oppression, breach of SHA, and drag/tag/ROFO/ROFR disputes arising in joint ventures and PE investments. Particular experience in India-Australia, India-Singapore, and India-GCC joint venture disputes.
Learn More →Investor-state dispute settlement under India's bilateral investment treaties. Claims by foreign investors against the Indian state, and defence of India's regulatory measures against BIT challenges. Proceedings before ICSID and under UNCITRAL rules.
Learn More →The seat of arbitration determines the supervisory jurisdiction and the applicable procedural law. For Singapore-seated proceedings, Singapore law governs the procedure and the Singapore courts supervise. GP understands both Singapore procedural law (through our SIAC panel arbitrator and NSW-qualified founding director) and Indian law (through our advocates). When your counterparty tries to run parallel proceedings in both jurisdictions, we can respond in both simultaneously.
The most common mistake in international arbitration is treating enforcement as a post-award problem. GP builds enforcement strategy into the arbitration from the first pleading — identifying attachable assets in India, preserving jurisdiction for Indian courts, and structuring arguments to anticipate public policy objections that will arise when the award is enforced in India.
You are an Indian individual named as respondent in a Singapore-seated SIAC arbitration. Your former business partner — now based in Australia — is claiming USD 8 million under a SHA you signed five years ago. You did not expect this. You need immediate Section 9 relief to freeze your own assets before enforcement, and you need counsel who can appear in both Singapore and India. GP can. GP does.
Our founding director has sat as arbitrator in SIAC proceedings. This is not a credential on paper. It means that when we advise you on how to present a case, draft a procedural application, or respond to a tribunal's procedural order, we are drawing on knowledge that only comes from having been the decision-maker. No other Indian Tier 1 arbitration practice can say this about its leadership.
International arbitration in India almost always produces parallel proceedings — Section 9 applications for interim relief, Section 34 challenges, Section 47 enforcement petitions. Most firms hand these off to separate litigation counsel. GP handles all of it with the same team, which means the strategy across the arbitration and the court proceedings is coherent and coordinated from day one.
Arbitration disputes with financial claims require expert evidence on quantum — lost profits, diminution in value, cost of reinstatement. GP's in-house forensic accounting team prepares quantum calculations and expert witness statements without the coordination delays and conflicts that arise when external experts are briefed. Your financial case is built alongside your legal case, not after it.
Client confidentiality is absolute. These matters are illustrative of our team's arbitration experience.
Represented the Indian promoter in a SIAC-seated arbitration arising from deadlock in an India-Singapore technology JV. Obtained emergency interim relief preserving the Indian entity's assets. Award on the merits in client's favour, enforced in India under Section 47 of the Act.
Advised a European EPC contractor in an ICC arbitration against an Indian government-linked entity over disputed milestone payments on a ₹1,800 crore infrastructure project. Co-counsel arrangement with Paris-based firm. GP led Indian law and enforcement strategy.
Advised a UAE-based investor on enforcement of a DIAC award against an Indian company whose principal had transferred assets to related parties. Section 47 petition filed in Bombay High Court. Contested public policy objections. Award enforced in full.
The Managing Director leads our International Arbitration practice with a practice history that spans appearing as counsel in ICC, SIAC, LCIA, HKIAC, and DIAC proceedings, sitting as arbitrator on the SIAC panel, and practising international arbitration from offices in Singapore, Hong Kong, and London before returning to India. There is no simulation of this experience. It is real, verifiable, and directly beneficial to every client GP represents in arbitration.
Supreme Court developments on the public policy ground for setting aside, the narrowing of patent illegality, and the impact on foreign award enforcement.
Read Bulletin →India remains the second largest source of parties in SIAC proceedings. What this means for Indian companies and individuals who find themselves as respondents in Singapore-seated arbitration.
Read Guide →