Section 22
Language
(1) The parties are free to agree upon the language or languages to be used in the arbitral proceedings.
(2) Failing any agreement referred to in sub-section (1), the arbitral tribunal shall determine the language or languages to be used in the arbitral proceedings.
(3) The agreement or determination, unless otherwise specified, shall apply to any written statement by a party, any hearing and any arbitral award, decision or other communication by the arbitral tribunal.
(4) The arbitral tribunal may order that any documentary evidence shall be accompanied by a translation into the language or languages agreed upon by the parties or determined by the arbitral tribunal.
Determination of Language in Arbitral Proceedings
Section 22 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, establishes the framework for selecting the language to be used in arbitration proceedings. It upholds the principle of party autonomy, allowing parties to mutually decide the language of arbitration. In the absence of such an agreement, the arbitral tribunal is empowered to determine the language, ensuring smooth conduct of proceedings. This provision applies uniformly to all aspects of arbitration, including written pleadings, hearings, awards, and tribunal communications, preventing linguistic barriers from hindering the dispute resolution process.
-
Party Autonomy in Language Selection:
The section begins by granting the parties the freedom to agree on the language or languages in which the arbitration will be conducted. This is a key element of party autonomy, enabling the disputing parties to choose a medium that suits their communication needs and expertise.
-
Tribunal Determination in the Absence of Agreement:
In the absence of an express agreement between the parties regarding language, this provision empowers the Ld. Arbitral Tribunal to determine the language(s) to be used. This safeguard ensures that the proceedings are not stalled by a lack of consensus on language.
-
Uniform Application:
Whatever the language chosen or determined, that language is to govern all aspects of the arbitration, from written submissions to the final award. The Ld. Tribunal may also require that documentary evidence be translated if necessary.
Judicial Interpretation
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CORE Vs. M/s ECI SPIC SMO MCML (JV) (2024) has stated that:
“8.2 Third, the parties have the autonomy to determine the conduct of arbitral proceedings, the procedure to be followed by the arbitral tribunal in the conduct of proceedings, the place of arbitration, the date of commencement of arbitral proceedings, the language to be used in the arbitral proceedings, the time for submitting statements of claim and defence, including amendments, whether the arbitral tribunal will conduct oral hearings or proceed on the basis of documents and other material, in cases of default by a party to communicate statement of claim or defence, or failure to appear at an oral hearing or produce documentary evidence, and regarding the appointment of experts by the arbitral tribunal.”
Conclusion
Section 22 enshrines the principle of party autonomy by allowing the disputing parties to choose the language or languages in which the arbitration will be conducted. In the absence of an express agreement, the provision empowers the Ld. Arbitral Tribunal to determine the language to be used for all aspects of the proceedings, including written pleadings, hearings, and the final award. This mechanism ensures that linguistic differences do not become an impediment to an efficient and coherent dispute-resolution process. In effect, Section 22 balances the freedom of the parties to select a mutually convenient language with the Ld. The tribunal’s ability to step in and decide when no agreement exists, thereby contributing to a smoother arbitration process.
Disclaimer: This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute any legal advice. Readers should seek expert legal counsel before taking any action based on the content.