Supreme Court forms new Constitution bench to hear two cases
Supreme Court forms new Constitution bench to hear two cases
It comprises the Chief Justice of India and four other judges
The Supreme Court recently formed a new Constitution bench to hear two cases - Cox and Kings vs SAP Pvt Ltd and Tej Prakash Pathak and Ors vs Rajasthan High Court and Ors.
The new bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice PS Narasimha, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra will begin the proceedings on 21 March.
Cox and Kings vs SAP Pvt Ltd
This matter arose out of arbitration proceedings and pertains to the issues concerning the ‘group of companies’ (GOC) doctrine.
The GOC doctrine states that a non-signatory may be bound by an arbitration agreement if it is a member of the same group of companies as the signatory and all parties to the arbitration agreement mutually intend that the non-signatory be bound by it.
The bench will deliberate on:
- Whether the GOC doctrine should be read into Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, or it can exist in Indian jurisprudence independent of any statutory provision?
- Whether the GOC should continue to be invoked on the basis of the principle of ‘single economic reality’?
- Whether the GOC doctrine should be construed as a means of interpreting the implied consent or intent to arbitrate between the parties?
- Whether the principles of alter ego and/or piercing the corporate veil can alone justify pressing the GOC doctrine into operation even in the absence of implied consent?
Tej Prakash Pathak and Ors vs Rajasthan High Court and Ors
The bench will deliberate on:
- Whether state instrumentalities can change eligibility rules after a selection process has begun? (In other words, can the criteria for appointment to a post be altered by authorities concerned in the middle or after the process of selection has started)?
The question in the reference order reads, "No doubt it is a salutary principle not to permit the state or its instrumentalities to tinker with the ‘rules of the game’ in so far as the prescription of eligibility criteria is concerned as was done in the case of C Channabasavaiah vs State of Mysore [AIR 1965 SC 1293], etc. in order to avoid manipulation of the recruitment process and its results. Whether such a principle should be applied in the context of the ‘rules of the game’ stipulating the procedure for selection particularly when the change sought is to impose more rigorous scrutiny for selection requires an authoritative pronouncement of a larger bench of this court."
The matter was earlier listed before a Constitution bench led by Justice Indira Banerjee. However, after her retirement in September last, the bench was dissolved.
