Indian courts exhibit no prejudice against Chinese firms, as evidenced by their enforcement of arbitral awards and asset freezes in favor of these companies, noted Senior Advocate Darius Khambata on Monday. Speaking at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Symposium 2026, Khambata participated in a panel titled ‘Cross-Border Disputes across China, India, and the US: Strategy, Enforcement, and Risk.’ The panel was moderated by Kabir Singh, a partner at Clifford Chance, and included other distinguished participants such as Three Crowns founding partner Luke Sobota, Alibaba Group’s Head of Dispute Resolution and Regulatory Investigations Li Jieyun, and Hui Zhong Law Firm Singapore head Hazel Tang.
Khambata emphasized that Indian courts maintain impartiality regarding the nationality of parties involved in legal proceedings. He stated, “I don’t see any bias in favor of our nationals against any particular national. Chinese companies have won enforcement of awards and secured Section 9 interim injunctions to freeze assets in Indian courts.” Under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, courts can offer interim protection before, during, or after arbitration processes, which may involve preserving disputed property or preventing parties from disposing of assets.
Despite ongoing political tensions between India and China, Khambata asserted that this impartial approach would persist. He remarked, “That should be so. But, of course, the political tensions are resulting in a complete reduction of trading relationships.” He noted that current geopolitical issues are overshadowing the economic potential of the two nations but expressed optimism about future commercial engagement. “I look forward to the day when both these two nations trade with each other. It will become potentially the greatest trading relationship the world has ever seen,” he added.
Khambata also touched upon the impact of sanctions and tariffs on international trade and arbitration. He argued that unilateral economic measures historically failed, causing conflict and eventually being withdrawn. “Unilateral sanctions or tariffs have never worked. If you study history, they’ve always ultimately been retracted and withdrawn and they’ve only led to conflict. They’ve never really worked,” Khambata stated.
He highlighted the need for specialized arbitral tribunals to handle disputes involving sanctions and tariffs due to their complex legal and commercial nature spanning multiple jurisdictions. While the international arbitration community currently lacks sufficient arbitrators for these matters, Khambata expects the field to evolve as tribunals gain more experience with sanctions, export controls, and tariff-related disputes.
More Read
From the Chinese perspective, Hazel Tang noted that disputes involving sanctions necessitate careful selection of arbitrators. Businesses prefer tribunals with expertise in sanctions, familiarity with Asia, and an understanding of the regulatory and commercial constraints faced by Chinese companies. Tang added that sanctions often disrupt business relationships, prompting companies to engage in direct negotiations and mediation to preserve commercial ties.
Li Jieyun explained that Chinese companies scrutinize an arbitrator’s track record, professional background, and familiarity with China. Neutrality remains crucial, particularly in disputes involving Chinese and Western parties. Companies are increasingly drafting detailed force majeure clauses in contracts with Western counterparts to address potential sanctions.
From a US perspective, Luke Sobota highlighted that multinational companies primarily seek impartial decision-makers who view sanctions as commercial disruptions rather than allowing a party’s nationality to influence the dispute. He noted that US courts typically interpret force majeure clauses strictly, focusing on the contractual language and assessing whether the disruptive event was foreseeable and could have been allocated between parties. The governing law could significantly affect the outcome.
