anti-competitive practices in the auto...

49 | August 2020www.legaleraonline.com |48 August 2020 | | www.legaleraonline.comLEGAL ERA LEGAL ERA

LETake on Board

Mediation takes one More

in india

he Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution (Department of Consumer Affairs) vide a Notification dated 15th July, 20201 in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and clauses (r) and

(zf) of sub-section (2) of section 101 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (35 of 2019), the Central Government has framed the rules which are called Consumer Protection (Mediation) Rules, 2020. The same have also been ordered to be brought in force from 20th July, 2020.

While the entire country is waiting for a separate standalone statutory legislation for Mediation in India, the above referred step taken by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs is laudable.

According to these rules, under Section 3, every Mediation Cell set up in a Commission, shall have a panel of Mediators on the recommendation of a Selection Committee consisting of the President and a Member of that Commission. Sub-clause 2 of Rule 3 further rules that the Mediation Cell shall have

T such support staff as may be decided by the President of that Commission in consultation with the concerned Government and that Government shall provide all administrative assistance and infrastructure facilities required by the Commission.

It is noteworthy that under Rule 4, the matters which cannot be referred for Mediation are specified and the same are as follows:-(a) the matters relating to proceedings in respect of medical

negligence resulting in grievous injury or death;(b) matters which relate to defaults or offenses for which

applications for compounding of offenses have been made by one or more parties;

(c) cases involving serious and specified allegations of fraud, fabrication of documents, forgery, impersonation, coercion;

(d) cases relating to prosecution for criminal and non- compoundable offenses;

(e) cases which involve public interest or the interest of

LE Take on Board

51 | August 2020www.legaleraonline.com |50 August 2020 | | www.legaleraonline.comLEGAL ERA LEGAL ERA

RAJIV DUTTASenior Advocate

Supreme Court of India,Fellow-CIArb.,

Arbitrator & Mediator

1 https://consumeraffairs.nic.in/sites/default/files/Mediation%20Rules.pdf

Disclaimer – The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the author and are purely informative in nature.

LE

Rajiv Dutta, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, has over 40 years of experience. Mr Dutta is presently a Member of the Panel of Arbitrators at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC); Panel Arbitrator at the ASSOCHAM International Council of Alternate Dispute Resolution (AICADR), New Delhi; Panel Arbitrator at the Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA); and Panel Arbitrator at the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC). He has acted as an Arbitrator under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) model rules, and in ICC International Commercial Arbitrations. Mr Dutta is a Supreme Court-trained Mediator actively involved in the conduct of mediations at the Supreme Court Mediation Centre. He is a Country Representative for India at the International Bar Association (IBA) Mediation Committee. He was a Member of the IBA Mediation Committee for drafting IBA rules for investor-state mediation. He has been appointed as the Vice-Chair of the Sports Law Committee of the International Bar Association (IBA); and to the Panel of Arbitrators of the Pacific International Arbitration Centre (PIAC), Vietnam. He is also an Associate Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and has been elected Vice-President of the Bar Association of India. He is a former elected Vice-President of the Supreme Court Bar Association. Mr Dutta has also served as a Visiting Professor (Comparative Law) under the Senior Lawyers Program of the Centre for International Legal Studies, Salzburg, Austria, at the Palacky University, Faculty of Law, Olomouc, Czech Republic in Spring, 2016

Author: Rajiv DuttaDesignation: Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India

abouttheauthor

numerous persons who are not parties before the Commission.

Provided that, in any case other than those mentioned in this rule, the Commission before which the case is pending may choose not to refer it to mediation if it appears to the Commission that no elements of a settlement exist which may be acceptable to the parties or that mediation is otherwise not appropriate having regard to the circumstances of the case and the respective positions of the parties.

Apart from the above, it is also specified in Rule 5 that where the Commission refers the parties to mediation, the complainant shall be entitled to receive full amount of application fee paid in respect of such complaint, if a settlement is reached between such parties.

The Rules further take care that if the parties provide to initiate any arbitral or judicial proceedings in respect of a matter which is the subject matter of the mediation and also when such parties have expressly undertaken not to initiate any such proceedings, the parties are debarred from initiating any such proceeding under Rule 6.

One more interesting aspect that has been taken care of by these Rules is in Rule 7 which lays down that settlement agreement will not be discharged on the death of a party and shall be enforceable by or against the legal representative of the deceased party under Rule 7.

The step taken by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs by framing the aforementioned Rules is laudable and will definitely allow the parties to settle their disputes which are either pending before the Commission for a very long period and will also allow the Mediators to come up with certain out of the box solution to cases which ultimately keep pending for long time either due to the backlog or due to some technical objections taken by the parties.

anti-competitive practices in the auto...

Documents