An Opt-In Appeal Against Awards
Arbitration is designed to produce a final and binding result. But where a party believes that an award contains a serious factual or legal error, the sole route available at present is approaching a national court, rather than obtaining a substantive review of the award within the arbitration.
Rule 36 of the CORD Rules offers another option.
Where the parties have expressly opted in, an award may be appealed to an Appellate Tribunal under the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (MCIA). The Appellate Tribunal may undertake a full review of the factual and legal basis of the award.
This allows parties to seek meaningful reconsideration while keeping the review within the arbitral process.
A genuine review of the award
An appeal is available where the award contains a material and prejudicial error of law, is based on erroneous and prejudicial findings of fact, or is liable to be set aside on a ground available under the law of the seat.
The Appellate Tribunal may affirm, vary or reverse the award, in whole or in part.
At the same time, the appeal is not intended to become a fresh arbitration. The Appellate Tribunal ordinarily works with the evidence already placed before the original tribunal. New evidence may be admitted only where a party was wrongly prevented from presenting it earlier.
Only where the parties want it
The appeal mechanism does not apply automatically. Parties must expressly agree to it, either in their arbitration agreement or subsequently in writing.
Parties who prefer a single, final determination can retain the usual finality of arbitration. Those who want an additional safeguard against material error can build it into their dispute resolution process.
Why it matters
Rule 36 gives parties a way to combine arbitral finality with meaningful error correction.
It also keeps that review institutionally separate. The original arbitration is administered by CORD, while the appeal is heard under MCIA. For parties concerned about a material factual or legal error in the award, the answer need not begin and end with recourse to national courts.
Rule 36, therefore, gives parties a choice. They can either retain the usual finality of arbitration, or build in a limited right of appeal where they find the additional safeguard meaningful.