At the London International Disputes Week 2026, Neeti Sachdeva, the Registrar and Secretary General of the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (MCIA), emphasized India’s potential to become a favored arbitration location. During a panel discussion co-hosted by Stewarts and JSA, Sachdeva argued that enhancing India’s reputation as a seat of arbitration is crucial for fostering confidence among international investors.
Building India’s Credibility in Arbitration
Sachdeva highlighted the importance of India’s growth as a preferred arbitration seat, observing that the expansion of Indian arbitral institutions on a global scale hinges on this development. “The challenge is not any other institution. The challenge is that India has to grow as a preferred seat in itself,” she remarked. Sachdeva believes that as foreign companies gain confidence in arbitrating within India, the presence of Indian institutions will naturally expand globally.
Regional Growth and Global Expansion
Sachdeva also noted that the rise of regional arbitration institutions complements rather than competes with established global centers. This expansion enhances the arbitration ecosystem by offering greater choice and developing local arbitration frameworks.
The panel included prominent figures such as Sherina Petit, Head of International Arbitration and India Practice at Stewarts, Dhiraj Nair, Partner at JSA, David Joseph KC from Essex Court Chambers, Gourab Banerji, President of the Arbitration Bar of India (ABI), Kevin Nash, Director General of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), Colleen Parker Bacquet from the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Shweta Bidhuri from the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, and Robert Stephen, Secretary General and Registrar of the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).
Efficiency Over Costs
Kevin Nash underscored the importance of efficiency over cost in arbitration, stating, “A well-run arbitration at an institution that has a slightly higher schedule of fees is almost always going to be cheaper.” He emphasized that the value in arbitration lies in effective case management rather than just cost schedules.
More Read
Addressing Misconceptions and Expanding Horizons
Colleen Parker Bacquet addressed misconceptions about the ICC, highlighting that 40% of their cases in the previous year involved disputes under $4 million, and 31% were between parties from the same country. Similarly, Shweta Bidhuri explained that not all cases under SIAC are seated in Singapore; SIAC rules are often chosen for arbitrations seated elsewhere.
Robert Stephen shared insights from the DIAC, noting its growing international reach. “The misconception that I hear the most is that it’s mainly for local and Middle Eastern disputes,” he said, pointing out that DIAC administers numerous complex cross-border disputes.
MCIA’s Independent Role
In discussing the MCIA, Sachdeva dispelled myths about its structure, clarifying that the MCIA operates as an independent neutral private trust, not a government entity. She emphasized the MCIA’s role in providing reliable arbitration services for both Indian and international parties.
More Read
The Role of Institutional Arbitration
The panel also explored the significance of institutional arbitration in providing support alongside ad hoc proceedings. Gourab Banerji noted that institutional backing is vital even when strong tribunals are in place, while David Joseph discussed the institutional role in ensuring efficiency and timely resolution of disputes.
Colleen Parker Bacquet detailed how scrutiny processes in institutions safeguard enforceability, and Kevin Nash added that institutional reviews aim to ensure practical and enforceable outcomes.
The discussion included insights on cost models, with Shweta Bidhuri and Robert Stephen advocating for ad valorem models for their predictability, and Kevin Nash highlighting the benefits of hourly-rate systems for efficiency monitoring. The panel also touched on the increasing use of emergency arbitration for interim relief in time-sensitive disputes.
