Boutique by Design - International by Instinct
Gaurav is a triple-qualified Solicitor and has acted in several high-value international arbitrations with leading international arbitration institutions including the ICC, SIAC, LCIA, and ICSID. He has also acted in commercial litigation before the courts of England & Wales.
Prior to joining Hamish Lal Partners, Gaurav worked with a specialist disputes law firm in London for several years. He has also worked with the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, World Bank Group in Washington D.C. where he advised on project finance transactions relating to infrastructure and energy projects in Africa, development finance transactions relating to European projects, and public international law.
Gaurav has practiced as an Advocate in India, and has worked with Judges of the Madras High Court and Justices of the Supreme Court of India. He is passionate about writing on legal issues, and was awarded the Michael Mustill Prize 2020 by the International Dispute Resolution Centre, London and St. John’s College, Cambridge. He has published in leading peer-reviewed journals such as:
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 “federal common law” 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 “there 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 “extend […]
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 ‘on-demand’ bond can only be restrained in cases of fraud […]
