Boutique by Design - International by Instinct
Vishnu holds qualifications in New York and India where he was a Law Clerk to a Justice in the Supreme Court of India. He has experience in high-profile commercial disputes across a range of industries, including energy, construction, finance, technology, and intellectual property rights. He has assisted in several international arbitrations with the ICC, LCIA, and SCC. He has also worked on investor-state arbitrations (ICSID and ad hoc).
Before joining Hamish Lal Partners, Vishnu worked in a Band 1 international arbitration law firm in London where he gained experience in complex cross-border disputes and large-scale actions for and against government entities. Prior to that, he worked on disputes involving large corporate entities in the infrastructure, energy, construction, and telecom sectors before Indian courts. Along with barristers, he regularly appeared before the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court, and the National Company Law Tribunal. In India, he was Rapporteur on discussions of the Law Commission and government-formed expert committees that analysed legislative reforms including reforms to the Indian arbitration law.
The US Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the legal regime governing non-signatories to arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act. In particular, the Court is now asked to resolve whether state law principles of equitable estoppel apply to a claim to extend an arbitration agreement, or whether âfederal common lawâ derived from a […]
Apportionment of liability amongst participants in an unincorporated joint venture is complex. Such complexity is increased when one participant is in dispute with the joint venture and the absence of arbitration joinder means that there are two arbitrations. This gives rise to questions of the boundary of jurisdiction of each Tribunal and to questions about […]
Arbitral awards are rarely set aside. In DWL v DWM,[1] the Singapore High Court dismissed an application to set-aside an arbitral award for excess of jurisdiction or breach of natural justice. Eminent judges have been clear âthere is a difference between, on the one hand, a party having no opportunity to address a point or […]
In JKD and anor v IKC,[1] the English High Court dismissed a challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to an arbitral Order refusing to restrain a call on a bond. This is another important case because it reinforces the thinking that section 68 challenges apply only to Awards (not arbitral Orders) and […]
In DSS v DST,[1] the Singapore High Court found that an award, where 108 out of the 211 paragraphs were wholesale or substantial reproductions of excerpts from a related award, was not rendered in breach of natural justice. The Claimant said that the reproductions were not limited to reciting of uncontroversial procedural matters but âextend […]
In TTSJV W.L.L and others v BapCo Refining B.S.C (TTSJV),[1] the English High Court dismissed an application for an injunction against a bond call. Applications to restrain bond calls are difficult, given the high threshold. London has reaffirmed the position that a call on an âon-demandâ bond can only be restrained in cases of fraud […]
