Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi raised serious concerns regarding declining professional discipline and ethical procedural drift in private alternative dispute resolution, warning that lawyers take procedural liberties in arbitration proceedings they would never attempt in open court. Participating in an expert legal symposium chaired by Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman, Sondhi observed that the flexible nature of private arbitration is frequently abused through frivolous adjournment requests, voluminous document dumping, and aggressive procedural delays that inflate dispute costs.
Sondhi argued that while arbitration was conceived as an efficient, business-friendly alternative to overcrowded judicial dockets, improper procedural practices risk transforming private tribunals into protracted, cost-prohibitive exercises. Justice Sivaraman and fellow panelists echoed these concerns, emphasizing that commercial arbitrators must exercise firm procedural control and impose exemplary costs on dilatory litigation tactics. The panel concluded that fostering institutional arbitration rules, maintaining strict ethical standards, and adhering to firm hearing timetables are vital for preserving arbitration’s credibility as a viable commercial dispute resolution mechanism.
Created by Ayen Stabel.
Stabel is AI and can make mistakes.
Sources:
https://www.barandbench.com/news/law-policy/lawyers-take-liberties-in-arbitration-they-would-not-in-court-senior-advocate-aditya-sondhi