IDEX LEGAL, known for its flagship event Legal Counsel Congress, recently concluded the launch edition of The Law Firm Congress - its latest initiative for Senior and Managing Partners of law firms. The conference hosted several meaningful discussions from excellent panelists and speakers and was peppered with insightful questions from the audience, making the forum not just a platform for exchanging ideas but also finding solutions to some of the most pressing concerns Managing Partners across India face in running their firms. The conference focused on addressing critical strategic and business challenges faced by law firms such as identifying the right growth strategy for your firm, effective metrics for talent measurement, technology for matter and finance management for law firms and the client’s view on their expectation from law firms. The conference closed with an interesting 90 minute session which saw three Managing Partners and a CEO share their stories on going from failure to success. Their next event will be the annual Legal Counsel Congress & Awards which will take place in Mumbai on 13-14 March 2014. The LCCA addresses the challenges GCs and legal decision makers’ face and will also felicitate them for their contribution to the corporate legal landscape via The IDEX LEGAL Awards, one of the most credible awards in the Indian legal fraternity. The awards are not just restricted to in-house counsels. The IDEX LEGAL Awards also honour and felicitate the law firms across through various categories. You can visit their website for the submission document or write in to IDEX LEGAL at varkha.israni@ideas-exchange.in

The Vice President of India M. Hamid Ansari has said that International Law as we know derives not from actions of any executive or legislative branch or any central authority, but from customary law and agreements signed by sovereign States. It also differs in respect of enforcement, which depends not on the power and authority of a central government, but on reciprocity, collective action and international norms. Delivering inaugural address at the Fourth Biennial Conference of Asian Society of International Law on the theme “Asia and International Law in the Twenty-First Century: New Horizons” here today, he has said that the conflict between international law and national sovereignty is today the subject to vigorous debates and there is a growing trend towards judging a State's domestic actions in the light of international law and standards. It is the general belief that the nation-state is the primary unit of international affairs, and only States may choose to voluntarily enter into commitments. The Vice President opined that International law was thus essentially concerned with political and economic relations between the States and also between States, the United Nations and other international organisations. The dias also included Dr EMS Natchiappan, President of Indian Society of International Law (ISIL), Mr Narinder Singh, Secretary General of ISIL, Prof VS Mani of Asian Society of International Law.

Asia’s top international jurists lawyers and jurists are meeting in New Delhi from November 14^th to 16^th to discuss various issues around the theme "Asia and International Law in the Twenty First Century: New Horizons. The conference will be inaugurated by Honourable Vice President of India Shri Hamid Ansari on 14th November at Indian Habitat Centre, New Delhi. There will be Judges from International Court of Justice (Hague), Presidents of American Society of International Law, Australia-New Zealand Society of International Law and European Society of International Law. The Conference is Fourth Biennial meeting of the Asian Society of International Law, hosted by Indian Society of International Law (ISIL). The ISIL is quite well known for its efforts to spread awareness of International Law in India. The ISIL was, in fact, inaugurated by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in 1959. Among the issues will be implementation of International Law in India. This session will be presided over by Honourable Chief Justice of India and this session will be participated by several other judges of Supreme Court. Other issues at the conference include Anti-dumping and safeguards, ASEAN-related special issues of International Law, Climate Law, Competition Law, Conflict of Laws relating to marriage, adoption, surrogacy and custody of children; Emergent Issues In International Human Rights Law, Intellectual Property Rights and so on. There will be special session sponsored by ISRO which among other things will deliberate upon a national space law for India. Along this conference, there will be a youth forum participated by young students on November 13^th, focusing on various issues. The three day conference hosted by ISIL promises to be a rich fair to the Indian lawyers, judges, diplomats, academics and students.

The Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies organized its first International Moot Court Competition 2013(VIPS IMC 2013) from the 4^th to the 6^th of October, 2013. The Moot Court saw around 26 teams battle it out for the coveted first prize. National teams included those from the famed National Law Universities, including, CNLU Patna, GNLU, NLIU Bhopal, NLU Odisha amongst others, and the International Teams included teams from Lagos University in Nigeria and Far Eastern University in the Philippines. The Semi Finals and the Finals were held on the 6^th of October which were presided over by High Court Judges and Supreme Court Judges respectively. Judges of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, included Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pathak, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manmohan, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sunil Gaur, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. L. Mehta who judged the Semi Final rounds, while Hon’ble Mr. Justice A. K. Sikri of the Supreme Court of India and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna of the High Court of Delhi judged the Finals. The winner’s trophy was bagged by Jamia Millia Islamia University, which put forward learned and lucid arguments. The team was represented by Ananya Mamgaain, Anirudh Arora and Christy Alex. Jamia Millia University also won the Best Mooter (Female) Prize. Hon’ble Mr. Justice A. K. Sikri of the Supreme Court of India, gave the proud winners, their trophy. Hidayatulla National Law University, Raipur came in second by a close margin. The Best Mooter (Male) Award was bagged by the team from Punjab University. The sponsors for the event, namely, LexisNexis Group, The Delhi State Cooperative Bank Ltd., India Law Journal, Manupatra, Lawteller, Lex Witness, Vaish Associates, Newspaper Association of India, Judicial Quest Magazine, Levitate-The property Advisor and The Education Tree were also thanked and felicitated at the ceremony.

Thomson Reuters, the world's leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals, today announced the launch of Advanced Program on Contract Drafting to meet the needs of managers working in legal, operations, finance, HR, purchasing, and business development. This online development training program focuses on the practical skills of contract drafting, negotiation, breach of contract and arbitration. The three month online program helps legal professionals draft clear and concise contracts that are enforceable and include arbitration clauses in the event of a dispute. Business professionals taking the course will benefit by understanding how to mitigate risk by having a stronger understanding of the nuances of contractual arrangements by working through case studies and virtual classroom discussions.

The Companies Act, 1956 ("1956 Act"), which held fort for more than five decades is sought to be replaced by the Companies Act, 2013 ("2013 Act") consisting of 470 sections and 7 schedules. The 2013 Act has been passed by both Houses of Parliament and has received assent of the President of India. However, the different provisions of the 2013 Act are to come into force on such date as the Central Government notifies in the Official Gazette. On September 12, 2013, the Central Government issued a notification for bringing into effect 98 sections of the 2013 Act. However, the corresponding sections of the 1956 Act have not been repealed and this may create a certain degree of confusion.

In a significant verdict affecting personality rights, the Ecuadorian Institute for Intellectual Property (Trademark Registry) vide its judgment/resolution dated 06.06.2013 while accepting the opposition filed by Mr. Lalit Bhasin, a leading lawyer in India has rejected the registration of the ARROZ GANDHI mark applied for by one Ana Valverde Munoz of Ecuador.

In this case, Mr. Bhasin on receiving information about clandestine registration of name and image of the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi in the South American Country Ecuador had filed an opposition petition in October, 2011 to a request for trademark registration by Ms. Munoz before the Trademark Office, Ecuador seeking registration of the name ‘ARROZ GANDHI’ as a trademark in Ecuador in international class 30 along with label/drawing of Mahatma Gandhi. Significantly, ‘ARROZ GANDHI’ when translated into English means, ‘Gandhi rice’. The trademark was sought to be registered in respect of ‘aged or old rice, also medium and long grain rice’ that may or may not come from India.

In his opposition petition, Mr. Bhasin stated that the said act by Ms. Munoz was almost a blasphemy in India as it could hurt the sentiments of the general public who have revered and respected Mahatma Gandhi as Father of the Nation. It was also stated in the petition, that no one can be permitted to carry any commerce and trade under the name and image of Gandhi that too for petty monetary gains, as he was a world famous leader. Mr. Bhasin also pointed out in his opposition that the law of India protects ‘Gandhi’ as a national emblem, under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act of India, 1950 wherein no one may use the name or pictorial representation of Mahatma Gandhi in a trademark or design without authorization of the Government of India.

Ms. Shailaja Lall, Partner and an Insurance sector expert, at Amarchand Mangaldas, New Delhi, recently led a distinguished panel on International Developments at the Lex Mundi Insurance and Reinsurance Cross-Border Legal Summit, held September 9-10 in Munich. The Summit witnessed participation from Insurance sector legal counsel and policy holders who shared perspectives on major industry trends and discussed cross-border challenges with Lex Mundi member firm lawyers from Europe, Asia, Latin America and North America. Some of the key themes that Ms. Shailaja Lall deliberated on included entry strategy in emerging markets, consumer protection, among others.

The Summit provided corporate counsel and claims professionals from multinational insurers, including Allianz, Munich Re, Swiss Re, RGA, and AIG, the opportunity to address hot topics such as evolving regulatory requirements, entry into emerging markets and structuring of multinational policies.

The Summit, organized by the Lex Mundi Insurance and Reinsurance Practice Group, included more than 30 Lex Mundi member firm lawyers including Shailaja Lall from Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff & Co. (Lex Mundi member firm for India); Hiroyuki Tezuka from Nishimura & Asahi (Lex Mundi member firm for Japan); Oliver Seig from Noerr LLP (Lex Mundi member firm for Germany); João Marcelo Santos from Demarest Advogados (Lex Mundi member firm for Brazil); and John Mathias from Jenner & Block LLP (Lex Mundi member firm for Illinois).

In a significant verdict affecting personality rights, the Ecuadorian Institute for Intellectual Property (Trademark Registry) vide its judgment/resolution dated 06.06.2013 while accepting the opposition filed by Mr. Lalit Bhasin, a leading lawyer in India has rejected the registration of the ARROZ GANDHI mark applied for by one Ana Valverde Munoz of Ecuador.

In this case, Mr. Bhasin on receiving information about clandestine registration of name and image of the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi in the South American Country Ecuador had filed an opposition petition in October, 2011 to a request for trademark registration by Ms. Munoz before the Trademark Office, Ecuador seeking registration of the name 'ARROZ GANDHI' as a trademark in Ecuador in international class 30 alongwith label/drawing of Mahatma Gandhi. Significantly, 'ARROZ GANDHI' when translated into English means, 'Gandhi rice'. The trademark was sought to be registered in respect of 'aged or old rice, also medium and long grain rice' that may or may not come from India.

Pharma companies in India are facing the challenge of an increasing complex, demanding and fast changing logistics and regulatory environment. Traditional approaches are being challenged by shorter market cycles, outsourced production, and increasing government regulations. Multinational Pharma companies are increasing efforts to strengthen their presence in India through research investment, licensing deals, co-marketing arrangements, acquisitions, or other partnerships. Lex Witness presents 2nd Annual Pharma Legal and Compliance Summit on 27th September 2013 at The Leela, Mumbai, brings together Industry thought leaders to share their interpretation and in forming an informed decision while drawing Legal and Business response strategy. www.plcs2013.com

With tremendous growth in the Media, Advertising and Entertainment Industry, to be the most competent sector in the Global Market, it has seen various regulations that bring about a new set of Business Challenges. Lex Witness presents 2nd Annual Media, Advertising and Entertainment Legal Summit 2013 on 20th September at Hotel Le Méridien, New Delhi, brings together Industry thought leaders to share their interpretation and in forming an informed decision while drawing Legal and Business response strategy. www.maels2013.com

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Shri Lal Mahal Ltd. v. Progetto Grano Spa held where the court has gone ahead to in fact overrule its own decision passed less than two years back. The Supreme Court while dealing with objections to enforceability of certain foreign awards on the grounds that such awards are opposed to the public policy of India, has significantly curtailed the scope of the expression 'public policy' as found under Section 48(2)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and thereby have limited the scope of challenge to enforcement of awards passed in foreign seated arbitrations.The judgment unmistakably establishes a difference between the scope of objections to the enforceability of a foreign award under Section 48 of the Act and a challenge to set aside an award altogether under section 34 of the Act. (Source: Nishtih Desai Associates)

In a recent decision, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh set out to decide the jurisdictional authority of Indian Courts to set aside an interim award passed under arbitration proceedings governed by the Singapore International Arbitration Centre Rules, 2007. It was held that the Indian Courts had no power to do so when the parties have submitted to the curial law of Singapore since a conjoined reading of the SIAC Rules and the International Arbitration Act makes specific provisions for setting aside an interim award which excludes the jurisdiction of Indian Courts. (Source: Nishtih Desai Associates)

Grayscale is a pan-Indian association of law students - both at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels. They provide ancillary legal services to lawyers and legal professionals free of charge, keeping in mind the unavailability of interns at the workplaces of lawyers all throughout the year. Their incentive being a word of recommendation, that is, if satisfied by the product they deliver, their client offers them an opportunity to operate as an intern or apprentice under his/her guidance. Founded by Rohan Mukherjee, Grayscale focuses purely on facilitating the outreach of law students, both nationally and internationally. Based on the concept of earning contacts, Grayscale works for various NGOs and social initiatives, runs GrayLine for private citizens, and has recently provided inputs to the Drafting Committee of the Film Certification and Cinematograph Act, 2010. The website may be accessed at www.grayscale.org.in.

Earlier an Indian party was allowed to make investments in joint ventures and/or wholly owned subsidiaries outside India, under the automatic route, not exceeding 400% (four hundred percent) of the net worth as on the date of the last audited balance sheet of the Indian party. Pursuant to RBI/2013-14/180 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.23 dated August 14, 2013, RBI has reduced the existing limit of 400% (four hundred percent) of the net worth of the Indian party to 100% (one hundred percent) of its net worth under the automatic route. Consequently, any overseas direct investment in excess of 100% (one hundred percent) of the net worth would now require RBI's approval.In respect of investments in overseas unincorporated entities in the energy and natural resources sectors too, RBI has reduced the existing limit of 400% (four hundred percent) of the net worth of the Indian company to 100% (one hundred percent) of the net worth of the Indian company. However, in respect of the navaratna public sector undertakings, ONGC Videsh Limited and Oil India Limited, the extant provisions for investing in overseas unincorporated entities and the overseas incorporated entities in the oil sector (i.e., for exploration and drilling for oil and natural gas, etc.), which are duly approved by the Government of India, without any limits under the automatic route, would continue. (Source: Udwadia Udeshi & Argus Partners)

Under the Liberalized Remittance Scheme ("LRS") formulated by RBI, resident individuals are allowed to make investments abroad, within the limits specified by RBI from time to time, for any permitted current or capital account transactions or a combination of both. The limit sanctioned by RBI under the LRS now stands reduced to USD 75,000. LRS can no longer be used for acquisition of immovable property, directly or indirectly, outside India. Resident individuals are permitted to set up joint ventures/wholly owned subsidiaries outside India for bona fide business activities within the limit of USD 75,000. The limits for the making rupee gifts or lending to a non-resident Indian/person of Indian origin who is a close relative, has also been reduced to USD 75,000.(Source: Udwadia Udeshi & Argus Partners)

India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. has purchased the entire 42.5% holding of Amaprop Ltd. (an entity managed by Amaranth Advisors LLC) in its subsidiary, Indiabulls Finance Company Pvt. Ltd., for a total sale consideration of Rs.260 crores (approximately, US$43,000,000). With the purchase of Amaprop's equity stake, Indiabulls Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. is now 100% owned by Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. In 2005, Amaprop acquired a 42.5% stake in Indiabulls Finance Company Pvt. Ltd. for Rs.130.97 crores and was issued 32,33,396 equity shares of Rs.10 each. However, a dispute arose between Indiabulls and Amaprop on the latter exercising its put rightunder the shareholders' agreement, as the put price arrived at in accordance with the agreement was rejected by the RBI being in excess of the Fair Market Value as per the then prevailing RBI pricing guidelines. The dispute was concluded through an arbitration process in New York, where the arbitral tribunal passed an award requiring Indiabulls to pay Rs.192 croresalong with interest and costs thereon to Amaprop for acquiring the 42.5% stake. Majmudar & Partners represented and advised Amaprop in opposing the challenge filed by Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd. under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in the Delhi High Court against the international arbitration award rendered in favour of Amaprop. Eventually, the Section 34 petition was dismissed with costs. Thereafter, the firm advised Amaprop on execution proceedings in the Delhi High Court to execute the foreign award, which culminated in the settlement agreement. The litigation matters were handled by partner, Mr. Neerav Merchant, and the share sale transaction was led by partner, Mr. Akil Hirani. Amaprop was also represented by US law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP. Fox Mandal, Delhi, represented Indiabulls.

Recently, the Delhi High Court in the case of AAA Portfolios Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT held that funds lying in an escrow account cannot be appropriated by the tax authorities as recovery of taxes in connection with a taxpayer's liability, when such funds are not held by the escrow agent on behalf of the taxpayer, or owed by the third party to the taxpayer. In the present case, the escrow agent has furnished an affidavit affirming that it does not hold any amount on behalf of the Petitioner in the escrow account, or owes any such amount to the Petitioner. Based on this reasoning, the Court concluded that the tax department has no power to call upon the escrow agent to remit such amounts lying in the escrow account. The instant case demonstrates a scenario wherein the tax authorities have tried to use garnishee proceedings to recover moneys lying in an escrow account, in which the taxpayer does not have any interest per se. In this respect, the Court has rightly pointed out that tax department cannot extend garnishee proceedings to the debtor of the taxpayer unless such a debt actually exists and the debtor confirms the same. ( Source: Nishith. Desai Associates)

Mrs. Pallavi Shroff, a star litigator and head of Competition Law practice at Amarchand Mangaldas, one of India's leading and largest full service law firms, has been recognized as one of the Most Powerful Women in Indian Business by Business Today. In its 10^th edition, the Most Powerful Women in Indian Business, an annual feature, celebrates the outstanding professional career of Mrs. Pallavi Shroff, which spans over three decades and is accentuated by some of the most path breaking and high profile legal cases at both national and international levels.

Mrs. Pallavi Shroff comes from an illustrious family of judges and has inherited the industry and brilliance of her father, the retired Chief Justice of India, Mr. Justice P. N. Bhagwati. An economics graduate from Delhi University, she did her post graduate degree in Management from Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies and subsequently, an LLB from the Government Law College, University of Mumbai. She then went on to marry Mr. Shardul Shroff, himself a renowned lawyer and a Managing Partner of Amarchand Mangaldas. In 1980, the two of them embarked upon a journey to take Amarchand Mangaldas to newer heights with setting up New Delhi, Kolkata and Ahmedabad offices of the Firm.

Mrs. Pallavi Shroff has been consistently rated as a leading lawyer by several international fora and publications. She is highly regarded for her versatility as a litigator and her experience in different areas of law dealing with trade and competition. Mrs. Pallavi Shroff has been awarded as the "Best Lawyer in Dispute Resolution in Asia" by Euromoney Legal Media Group's Asian Women in Business Law Awards 2011; "The Leading Woman Consultant Award" at Women Leaders Conference 2010; Recognized by FLO, the women's wing of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry for "Excellence in Law", "Best Woman Lawyer of the Year 2012" at the Legal Era Law Awards 2011-12. Her role in the landmark deal between Satyam Infotech and Tech Mahindra catapulted her in to the Hall of Fame with Verve, a magazine from the stable of India Today Group, placing her on a list of "India's 50 Most Influential Women". One of India's top business newspapers – The Financial Express – acknowledges Mrs. Shroff as being "the most distinguished lawyer couple in the country" along with her husband Mr. Shardul S Shroff.

Mrs. Shroff has been acclaimed in the competition sphere by Chambers & Partners as "a legal luminary with the brilliant acumen necessary to crack the most complex legal cases. Her knowledge in competition law is unparalleled" and is one of the few lawyers in Band 1 of the rankings. Chambers Asia Pacific Guide for 2013 describes Mrs. Shroff as "an extremely talented lawyer" who is "brilliant in this field". As an expert in the field of Dispute Resolution and Arbitration, Mrs. Shroff has had the honour to be described as a "maestro" and a "top class, star litigator" by the Chambers & Partners (Asia) Guide. Mrs. Shroff has consistently been ranked in Band 1 as an expert in Dispute Resolution in India by Chambers & Partners (Asia Pacific Guide) Guide.

The Society of Indian Law Firms ("SILF") & Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy Training ("MILAT") held a Law Symposium and Awards cermony to honour distinguished law teachers, law students and law schools for their contribution to legal development and advancement of the legal profession on 1st September 2013 at the Hyatt Regency, New Delhi. Hon'ble Justice Madan Lokur, Judge, Supreme Court of India was the chief guest of the symposium comprising of a galaxy of eminent panelists including Lalit Bhasin ( president, Society of Indian Law Firms), N.R.Madhava Menon (Chairman, Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy Training), Arun Mohan (Senior Advovate and eminent author), eminent jurist Prof.Mohan Gopal. The speakers emphasised the need for Court Mangers to focus on the twin issues of making judicial administration as well as support system administration in Courts more efficient and litigant friendly in order to cut delays and speed up disposal of cases. The Symposium discussed various institutionalised structures required to be put in place for Court Managers to make judicial administration standardised and efficient across India. Speakers emphasied the need for Law Schools to develop curriculums on skills required by Court Managers and legal Institutions such as SILF were called upon to provide ongoing training to Court Managers. Hon'ble Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed, Acting Chief Justice of Delhi High Court was the chief guest of the award ceremony comprising of a galaxy of eminent dignitories including Justice Deepak Verma (Judge, Supreme Court of India (Retd.)), Fali Nariman (Chairman-Emiritus, Bar Association of India), Lalit Bhasin ( president, Society of Indian Law Firms), N.R.Madhava Menon (Chairman, Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy Training), Manoj Kumar (Managing Partner, Hammurabi & Solomon), Prof.Siva Kumar (MILAT). Prof (Justice.) Avadh Behari Rohatgi (Posthumous) was awarded the SILF-MILAT Distinguished Law Teacher Award 2013. Mukul Rohatgi, Senior Advocate and son of late Justice Rohatgi received the award on behalf of his late father. Prof. V.S.Mani (Director, Seedling School of Law & governance, Jaipur) was awarded the SILF-MILAT Prof.N.R.Madhava menon Best Law Teacher Award 2013. Amity University Law School & ILS Law College were awarded the SILF-MILAT Institutional Leadership Award 2013.

NLSIU, Bangalore students winning team at the Jessup International moot court were awarded the SILF MILAT Best Law Student Award 2013. Prof.Ashok R.Patil of NLSIU, Bangalore was awarded the SILF-MILAT Education Innovation Award 2013.

Prakash Pillai has joined Clyde & Co Clasis Singapore from Rajah & Tann where he was head of the firm's South Asia practice. His main focus is on international commercial arbitration and on commercial litigation. He has extensive experience in international commercial arbitration and commercial litigation work and has appeared in a broad spectrum of contentious matters before various arbitral tribunals, as well as the High Court and Court of Appeal of Singapore. He has also been recognised as a leading lawyer for his expertise in international arbitration in leading journals such as Chambers Global, the International Financial Law Review and the Global Arbitration Review. Prakash is the Chairman of the Public and International Law Committee of the Law Society and Vice-Chairman of the Publications Committee. He was formerly an adjunct Associate Professor at the National University of Singapore teaching Indian Business Law. Prakash is an established legal author and also contributes articles regularly to the Singapore newspapers and the Singapore Law Gazette (the main Law Society publication).

An Indian woman who had an arranged marriage with a mentally disabled British Sikh man has been warned that she faces life in prison if she were to sleep with her husband. Justice Holman, said the woman's husband lacked the capacity to consent to a sexual relationship. The woman had pleaded with the court not to annul her marriage to the man who is being cared for at a local authority home in the West Midlands. Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council had asked the court to declare the marriage not recognized in England and Wales because the man lacked capacity to consent to the marriage. However, the judge gave in to the woman's request and declined to annul the marriage. (Source: Times of India)

Recently, the U.S. District Court of Illinois in Bikramjit Singh Kalra v. United States of America quashed summons that were issued by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service pursuant to a request made by the Indian tax authorities concerning the tax liability of Bikramjit Singh Kalra on grounds of lack of statutory procedure and purpose. The Indian authorities' request for information was made under Article 28 of the India-USA tax treaty, which deals with the exchange of information and administrative assistance. Under this Article, India and the US can exchange information, including financial information for carrying out the provisions of the country's domestic law as well as the treaty provisions. Article 28(3) provides that US tax authorities shall not be obligated to obtain information or carry out administrative measures at variance from the laws of the US. (Source: Nishtih Desai Associates)

Stamping on the strength of Bilateral Investment Treaties, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes has recently passed awards on two elongated disputes which are of significance, namely, Inmaris Perestroika Sailing Maritime Services GmbH and others v. Ukraine and The Rompetrol Group N.V. v. Romania. The awards have explored the dimensions of investor rights under the BITs vis-à-vis the standard of 'fair and equitable treatment'. The awards have added to the growing body of investment arbitration awards which give a liberal interpretation to the 'fair and equitable treatment' standard under BITs. In the Inmaris case, the blatant abrogation of contractual obligations by the State has been held to be a breach of the principle of 'fair and equitable treatment' as also an act of expropriation. In the Rompetrol case, the tribunal pronounced that State acts such as criminal investigations could also be considered breach of BIT obligation of 'fair and equitable treatment' if not carried out in a just manner. It was further laid down in this case that multiple acts by the State, considered cumulatively, could lead to breach of treaty obligations even though the same acts may not be violative of the Netherlands-Romania BIT when considered individually. (Source: Nishtih Desai Associates)

Sudan is facing international condemnation as the trial resumes today of Lubna Hussein, a Muslim woman who faces a flogging for breaking indecency laws by wearing trousers. Hussein wants to force the repeal of Article 152 of Sudan's penal code, which orders a fine and flogging for women dressed in an "indecent" manner. She was arrested with 12 other women on July 5 at a restaurant in Khartoum. Public order police rounded up the women and subjected them to a humiliating public inspection of their clothing before arresting those in trousers. (Source: http://www.topnews.in/law/muslim-woman-returns-court-trial-over-sundanese-039039indecency039039-laws)

Courts in India or in other jurisdictions such as the UK commonly interpret a contract based on a plain and simple reading of the clauses. Occasionally, in instances where a simple construction of the contract leads to ambiguous or commercially unreasonable results, courts endeavor to ascertain the actual intention of the parties at the time of signing of the contract. Such an exercise to ascertain the commercial intention of the parties is carried out by reading the contract as a whole. Courts rarely attempt to ascertain the commercial intent of the parties by relying on external factors such as surrounding circumstances at the time of signing of the contract, communication prior or at signing of the contract etc. In one such rare instance the UK Court of Appeals in Belfairs Management Limited v. Matthew Sutherland & Ors. relied on the surrounding circumstances at the time of signing of an acquisition agreement to determine the scope of a warranty clause. ( Source: Nishith. Desai Associates)