Journal articles on the topic 'Administrative arbitration award'

Recent legislative amendments regarding an arbitration agreement incorporated into the agreement of accession have contributed to the formation of the concept in the Russian doctrine giving additional argumentation in favor of qualifying clauses envisaging the consideration of domain disputes under the UDRP as arbitration agreements. Taking into account a number of procedural and legal consequences determined by both the fact of the conclusion of the arbitration agreement and the fact of the award, the author raises the question of the nature of clauses providing for the consideration of disputes under the UDRP procedure. The study of the main properties and characteristics of the clauses under consideration leads to the conclusion that the balance between public law and private law foundations defined in the doctrine inherent to the arbitral agreement, does not meet the nature of the dispute resolution clauses under the UDRP (the impossibility for the domain name holder to refuse from the clause; the absence of the derogatory effect of the clause, etc.). Accordingly, enforceability of this clause cannot be determined under the provisions of the Federal Law on Arbitrazh [Arbitration] of 2015 and the Law of the Russian Federation on International Commercial Arbitration of 1993, providing the conclusion of the arbitration agreement, which, for example, include the principle of effective interpretation of an arbitration agreement that does not exclude in a number of cases the competence of the arbitral tribunal in the absence of the agreement signed by the parties. In this regard, the author questions the argumentation in favor of unenforceability of the clause under consideration based on the named laws.The study of certain principles of dispute resolution proceedings under the UDRP (limited list of remedies; resolution of the dispute in the form of oral hearings only on the initiative of an administrative commission; the unduly short period of time provided for both response to the claim and going to a competent court; the disparity of the dispute resolution clause, etc.) allows the author to conclude that, in some cases, such a clause is burdensome for the owner of the domain name due to the violation of the principles of legality and independence in the establishment and formation of a specific administrative commission.

ABSTRACT: With the reform of the current arbitration act, Spain tries to unify the criteria of the case law in all kind of questions related to arbitration, concentrating the competence in the High Courts of the Autonomous Regions, remaining the first instance courts the only competent for the enforcement of arbitral awards. The corporate arbitration for the solution of disputes in the so called "sociedades de capital" and with its shareholders is expressively ruled. It is no longer necessary that in arbitration proceedings according to law, the arbitrator is a lawyer admitted to a bar, being sufficient to be jurist. The previous activity as mediator is not compatible with the arbitrator. The arbitral award always need to have a motivation, not being possible another agreement between the parties. In case of an institutional arbitration procedure, the institution has to procure for the capacity and the independency of the arbitrator, who also has to contract an insurance police. The non-compliance with the six months period for rendering the award, which is maintained, does not affect neither the validity of the arbitration clause nor the award. In case of an insolvency procedure, in principle the arbitration commitment is maintained. Finally, the law provides for a mechanism for the resolution of disputes between the General Administration of the State and its different entities.

Abstract This article critically interrogates the experience of African States within the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) system through an analysis of certain procedural issues. Such issues cover a very wide terrain of different issues during the arbitration process, excepting the determination of the substantive rights and obligations of the disputants. The primary focus of this article is on issues relating to the constitution of tribunals and applications for the disqualification of arbitrators by African States as parties to disputes under the ICSID regime. Finally, it briefly mentions post-award actions within the ICSID regime, in which African States have also been active. It concludes that the engagement of African States within the ICSID regime will increase with the growth of cross-border intra-African investment activities. This will also lead to an increase in the participation of African lawyers in the ICSID system. This will be achieved through their appointment as counsel, arbitrators, conciliators and experts—not just by the Chairman of the ICSID Administrative Council but also by these African parties. Finally, this increased participation of African parties and States will continue to contribute to the development of the ICSID jurisprudence and its influence on the development of international investment law.

This text contains a general, althought synthetic, analysis on the administrative arbitration law, in Portugal. It begins with a reference to the appearance of administrative arbitration law in Portugal, followed by an analysis of the “arbitrable” administrative disputes and the challenging and enforcement of the arbitral awards. Finally, it focus the publicity of arbitral awards.

The introduction of compulsory arbitration in New South Wales in 1901 did not lead to increased union membership levels among building and construction industry workers. The administration of the Act proved largely unworkable and delivered positive results to building employers rather than unionists. Instead, the recovery of unionism in this sector after the 1890s depression was due to a range of economic and other institutional factors, including the positive stimulus provided by the Public Works administration of E. W. O'Sullivan. The introduction of a revamped arbitration framework in 1908 probably did contribute to the strong growth in union membership in succeeding years, given the greater accessibility to awards it provided. Still, much of this encouragement was at best indirect. Here again, though, other factors— economic, industrial relations and political—were probably at least as important. Among these were a sustained building boom, the changed structure of the industry's workforce, the increasing scale of projects and a growing worker dissatisfaction with arbitration's meagre fruits.

The Egyptian Arbitration Law No. 27/1994 (the ‘Egyptian Arbitration Law’) was enacted without delineating the subject of arbitrability of administrative contracts. This was one of the hottest pre-existing debates preceding the promulgation of the Egyptian Arbitration Law, yet the latter has succinctly mentioned that arbitration is valid between public and private entities. The Legislature did not find such wording sufficient to settle this debate and decided in 1997 to introduce a specific amendment elaborating this issue. The 1997 amendment might have settled the arbitrability of administrative contracts debate, however, it initiated another debate when it required that arbitration agreements under administrative contracts be approved by the competent minister. Until now, there are some unsettled issues concerning this ministerial approval requirement. For instance, which party is liable to procure such ministerial approval: the administrative authority or its private counterparty? Could this ministerial approval be implied? For example, what if the competent minister has attended the contract signing ceremony, would that be enough? Another recurring question is whether such a ministerial approval pertains to public policy or not. This article tries to answer these questions in light of the recent decisions rendered by the Egyptian courts and arbitral tribunals. Ministerial Approval Requirement, Administrative Contracts, State Contracts, Egyptian Arbitration, Public Policy, Annulment of Arbitral Awards, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Implied Consent, ex officio, Egyptian State Council

The effort to attract commercial arbitration to the Permanent Court of Arbitration [hereinafter PCA] in 1962 by introducing the Rules of Arbitration and Conciliation for Settlement of International Disputes between Two Parties of Which only One is a State [hereinafter the 1962 Rules], has met with little success. In other articles of this issue of the Leiden Journal of International Law the reasons for this failure are discussed. These articles also contain suggestions on how changes in the legal framework and the administration of the PCA may improve this situation.

The implementation of the arbitral award is the final stage of the arbitration process, which is the substance of the arbitration agreement, since the control is based on the principle of the authority of the administration and as it is the focus of this research, the arbitration judgment, as well as the implementation of the arbitral award, will be discussed in addition to the terms of the enforceable judgment, as well as judicial control over the execution of the award to reach the result that the legislator was not successful in organizing methods of appeal by arbitration. The Jordanian legislator adopted the broad concept of executive bonds and then not limited to judgments and decisions, but included official and ordinary bonds and tradable commercial papers. The executive bonds are the documents specified in the law of enforcement or any other law and are the reason for establishing the right to implement execution and Article 6 of the Jordanian Enforcement Law referred to this. In addition, the Jordanian Arbitration Law No. 31 of 2001 approved the implementation of the arbitrators' judgments if the court ruled to uphold these provisions. The focus of our study was to implement the arbitral award as an executive bond and for its specificity as a judgment issued by natural persons with no jurisdiction. Only derive their task from the will of individuals. The parties to the dispute, but the reality that made the arbitration at the present time of the features that make it more acceptable by individuals to settle their disputes from resorting to the jurisdiction of the state, and respect for the legislator and his quest for stability and security made those decisions executive bonds under certain conditions are implemented through them. It is on this basis that this study is divided into sessions and we will address the concept of arbitral award. Then the implementation of the arbitration award and then we will discuss the terms of the arbitral award and enforceable judicial control over it and then move to the conclusion and its recommendations.

The arbitrability of anti-competition disputes in the Philippines remains to be tested. It is since the Philippine Competition Act is relatively at its infancy, and cases are yet to be brought before the courts. This area entails much complexity considering that competition disputes are by nature imbued with public policy concerns, a mandatory exception for arbitration. This paper aims to examine the arbitrability of competition disputes under the Philippine domestic arbitration regime. After conducting an examination of cases and literature both in the Philippines and abroad, the paper argues that the Philippines may consider the US and French positions as to the arbitrability of competition disputes despite the presence of various public policy concerns. The public policy issues should only be taken into consideration when an arbitral award is brought before judicial bodies for recognition and enforcement and should not bar domestic arbitral bodies from taking cognizance of these disputes. It is to accommodate the state policy regarding alternative means of settling disputes such as arbitration in rendering speedy administration of justice. Whenever an award is granted, the same will be subject to court's intervention for recognition with due respect to the public policy concerns. In so doing, arbitration is being promoted without sacrificing the competition law policy of the Philippines.

The administration of Justice in Italy has raised difficult problems, due to the high number of judicial proceedings pending before judges. Usually it takes three years for the first degree, other three years for the appeal, two years for the Cassation. Among other devices, the Minister of Justice has improved any kind of ADR. Arbitration is the most important because is a (private) proceeding equaled to a judicial one (see Order of Cassation, October 25,2013,n. 24153). The Minister has created a Commission for studying and proposing means of expansion of ADR in order to reduce the charge of judges. Mediation, conciliation, settlement agreements (particularly in family matters) are already very frequent, but the situation should be improved. The proposals suggested to the Minister (and to the Parliament) by the Commission concerning arbitration were: introducing arbitration in labor litigation; possibility of immediate appeal before the Court of Cassation on the grounds of invalidity of the award; including into the Code of Civil Procedure the rules concerning arbitration for disputes between shareholders; extending arbitration for settlement of disputes between private subjects and public Administration are only some of the devices for reaching a speed and technically reliable solution of the conflicts.

ABSTRACT: This article aims at analyzing (1) if, under Brazilian law, the arbitrator is bound by the binding precedents (decisões e súmulas vinculantes) rendered by the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court to the same extent they are binding in the judicial and administrative spheres; and (2) what are the potential consequences of the violation of such binding precedents in the arbitral award, both domestic and foreign. The study is essentially based on an analysis of (i) the extent, binding force and appliance of the precedents and the case law in the Common Law and Civil Law systems, and, more specifically and recently, in the Brazilian system of laws; (ii) the extent, binding force and appliance of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court' binding precedents in the judicial and administrative spheres, and (iii) the limits imposed on the domestic and foreign arbitral awards to produce effects within the Brazilian territory.

There is no consent regarding the nature and effects that should be given to a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) in the international level. Consequently, some jurisdictions conceive it merely as a contract with the correspondent enforcement procedure, whereas others seek to provide it with a stronger effect homologating the MSA with a judgment or even an arbitral award. In this diverse setting, the Ecuadorian experience presents an interesting case of analysis because it provides the MSA with the same effects of a final judgment and of res judicata establishing a summary enforcement procedure. Such disposition provides the MSA with an original nature that in a way combines both contracts and judgments. Therefore, the document containing the MSA has been defined as an authentic instrument product of an alternative mechanism for the administration of justice, which provides it with the effects of a final judgment and of res judicata, and that contains a typified or nominated convention which essential characteristics are determined by the Arbitration and Mediation Law.

In order to keep the readers of the Bulletin up-to-date, the Research Service is undertaking a monthly report of Labour Jurisprudence. In principle, this report will bear on current cases of jurisprudence whether in the Civil Courts, as the Superior Court or the Court of King's Bench, or in the arbitration courts, or again on the interesting decisions of the different Provincial and Federal administrative Commissions. We might even deal with particular decisions of the courts of other countries. Although our special aim will be to stick to current cases it will frequently happen that the report will refer to the past in order to present the reader with an analysis of cases which remain, in spite of the passage of time, of great current interest. We are very well aware that jurisprudence has its most solid sources in decisions which go a long way back.

From 2010 to 2016, then-President Benigno Aquino balanced China's expansive maritime claim in the South China Sea. President Aquino challenged China by shifting the AFP's focus from domestic security to territorial defence, bolstering closer Philippine–US security relations, acquiring American military equipment, seeking from Washington an explicit security guarantee under the 1951 Mutual Defence Treaty (MDT), and promoting a strategic partnership with Japan. However, the Duterte administration is unravelling its predecessor's balancing agenda by distancing itself from the United States and gravitating closer to China, despite the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) July 12 2016 award to the Philippines. President Duterte's foreign policy is directed at reviving the equi-balancing policy on China, in contrast to then-President Aquino's balancing strategy. This is best exemplified by his efforts to harness China for several major infrastructure and investments projects in the Philippines and to resort to bilateral negotiations with Beijing. The present article argues that instead of relying on the US, President Duterte is fostering closer security partnership with Japan to equi-balance an emergent China.

The article substantiates the need for a comprehensive forensic examination of phaleristic items – orders, medals, and other badges of distinction involved in the sphere of legal proceedings on criminal, civil, arbitration cases, and cases of administrative offenses. The article notes the features of forensic research of state awards of the RSFSR, the USSR, and the Russian Federation, which result from their specific legal status and normatively fixed manufacturing enterprises.The legitimacy of using the concept of “authenticity” in forensic experts’ conclusions concerning state awards and other subjects of phaleristics has been substantiated. The question of authenticity is crucial and, at the same time, one of the most challenging questions in the research of phaleristic items. Its solution requires assessing all the item’s basic properties and, in many cases, the study of a significant amount of reference and historical material.The features of the use of specialized knowledge of history, forensic traceology, forensic examination of materials, substances, and products, forensic merchandising examination, forensic technical examination of documents in the course of phaleristic objects’ forensic study are analyzed. The author provides methodological recommendations for determining the sequence of conducting various types of research, formulating conclusions based on the results of a comprehensive study, and drawing up expert opinions.

Abstract R&D is one of the most important sources of knowledge and economic growth worldwide, and technology transfer is the principal means to access this knowledge. Nevertheless, market imperfections, externalities, and abusive behaviors have been used by some jurisdictions to justify the enactment of regulations on different contractual categories frequently used to implement this transfer of technology. According to the UNCTAD 2001 report, technology transfer agreements encompass an array of agreements differentiated by their subject matter. Such contracts cover, amongst other things, industrial property, know-how, and technology expertise.1 Most of the doctrine considers technology transfer agreements as an autonomous contractual category due to their standard features,2 such as their bilateral character, the reciprocal rights and obligations between the parties, and the presence of intellectual property rights.3 Thus, the agreements that belong to this category are often determined by the existence of intellectual property rights and know-how. These rights mainly protect useful knowledge that can be exploited in the market by its legal owner or the person who is authorized to do so. The exploitation of intangible assets is carried out using different sorts of contracts, frequently not regulated by law or other statutes and sometimes with a high degree of complexity, depending on the relevant technical matter and the parties’ activities. However, nowadays, despite the lack of specific regulation for most of these types of agreements, they are frequently used in the market and are indeed the licensing agreement that is most used and one of the few that are regulated in some jurisdictions.4 In the same sense, it is essential to highlight the presence of other contracts; for example, it is possible to find features of a trademark license, the sale of products, distribution, or even agency in a franchise agreement. This presence occasionally leads to difficulties in the construction of the parties’ will when there is silence or poor wording on the obligations to be performed. Concerning the construction of the contract, there are different forms that a technology transfer agreement may assume. In this regard, we must point out that the lack of legal classification5 means that it is necessary to use various sources, such as case law, arbitration awards, decisions of administrative bodies, and of course doctrine to carry out a complete analysis of these contracts. For the purpose of this study, a technology transfer agreement is to be considered as the transaction that allows a party to access a technology owned by the other party in exchange for consideration. This article’s main objective is to show how technology transfer occurs through licensing agreements in other complex contracts like joint ventures and franchising agreements. In order to illustrate this transfer of technology, we will throughout this article use statutes and case law of the European Union, the United States, and the Andean Community (CAN). The aim is to present, initially, the scope of the expression technology transfer; we will then examine how these three legal categories work, the relationship between these complex contracts and licensing, and finally, the importance of using the structure of licensing in joint ventures and franchising agreements adequately.

This article is published in two parts. In the first part (published in this edition of Obiter) the authors establish the general principles relating to administrative review and consider the different forms of review. Thereafter CCMA arbitration award reviews are considered. As is characteristic of special statutory reviews the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (“the LRA”) makes specific provision for the review of CCMA arbitration awards. The grounds of review are presented in such a manner that it has the effect of limiting the ambit. The administrative nature of CCMA arbitrations is considered. It is pointed out that the courts regard the CCMA as organ of state andthat the rendering of an arbitration award is considered as the commission of an administrative act that is subject to the constitutional imperatives of the administrative justice right of the Constitution. The authors also establish that the courts have not interpreted the restrictive scope of section 145 of the LRA as falling foul of the constitutional right to administrative justice. Rather, the courts have reasoned that, when reading section 145 in light of the constitutional right to administrative justice, the alleged misconduct, grossirregularity, exceeding of powers or impropriety as the case may be need only be measured against the constitutional imperatives of the administrative justice right in order to ensure constitutional consistency. So construed, an arbitration award would be reviewable if the reviewing court is able to conclude that the commissioner has committed misconduct or a gross irregularity or has exceeded his powers in terms of section 145(2) of the LRA because the decision is not justifiable in terms of the reasons given. The award would, however, not be reviewable only because it is perceived to be unjustifiable per se; the justifiability must be attributed to one or moreof the statutory grounds of review found in section 145(2) of the LRA. In Part 2 of the article the effect of the judgment of the Constitutional Court in Sidumo v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd 2007 12 BLLR 1097 (CC) will be analysed as well as the application of the principles established in Sidumo in subsequent case law. Finally the reasonableness standard and private arbitration reviews will be considered. Part 2 will be published in the following edition of Obiter.

This article is published in two parts. In the first part (published in the previous edition of Obiter) the general principles relating to administration review were established and the different forms of review considered. It was also established that the making of a CCMA arbitration award constitutes administrative action that is subject to the constitutional right to administrative justice; that justifiability is a constitutional requirement for just administrative action and that a failure to make a decision that is justifiable in terms of the reasons given may render an award reviewable in terms of section 145 of the LRA. This second part of the article will build on the conclusions of the first by focusing on setting out the key findings made by the CC in Sidumo v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd (2007 12 BLLR 1097 (CC)) as regards the test for reviewing arbitration awards in terms of section 145 of the LRA. The purpose is to establish how reasonableness might best be understood and defined as well as to determine its implications for subsequent review proceedings. Case law that has sought to interpret and apply the principles established in Sidumo, will likewise be discussed in order to contextualise the place of reasonableness in the review of arbitration awards with a view better to understand its implications for the courts’ review function. Particular attention will be given to determining the applicability of the reasonableness standard to jurisdictional reviews. The principles laid down by the labour appeal court in Fidelity Cash Management Service v CCMA (2008 3 BLLR 197 (LAC)) will also be discussed with the objective of determining whether the court’s approach that an award is not reviewable because of flawed reasoning determining that the outcome is sustainable according to reasons identified in the record, and whether this finding is consistent with CC’s findings in Sidumo. It will also be considered whether the reasonableness standard as introduced by Sidumo will have any influence on the review of private arbitration awards in terms of section 33 of the Arbitration Act 42 of 19652 and whether parties can agree that an award would be reviewable on the same grounds and subject to the same test as a CCMA award. Finally, proposals will be made in respect of the interpretation and application of the reasonableness principle for the purpose of assisting in review proceedings to come.

The adoption of separation of power principles given by Montesqiu in governing the state in Timor-Leste is clearly granted by its 2002 Constitution. However, the debate on its interdependent competence in regard to the legislatif initiative and authority delegation to enact any regime remain doubted. Include in this study on these two major organs of executive lead by the government and the legislatif led by the parliament on its interdependent competence on enacting of the Voluntary Arbitration Legal Bill in Timor-Leste. Early this year, the Timor-Leste Government enacted a new Voluntary Arbitration Legal Bill aligned with passing a Government Resolution on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award (convention on the recognition and implementation of foreign Arbitration Awards). This Convention has been ratied by the Timor-Leste National Parliament through the Resolution number 3/V/2 dated 20 January 2021 concerning Timor-Leste's accession to the 1959 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. This study examined the interdependence on the separation of powers in a two dominant competence system which are the government with the competence of Delegation Authorities to initiate a legislation and the parliament with the attribution to enact a legal regime and more over to the political decision on proposed law of the Voluntary Arbitration Legal Bill. Hence, this study resume that, although the government competence attribute by the constitution were stipulated clearly in Timor-Leste Constitution in article 115 (3) such as its competence to has exclusive legislative competence on matters concerning its own organization and functioning, as well as on the direct and indirect administration of the State. Hence this competence provide authorities to propose and drafting any legal regime that matters to government concern only as authorized by the parliament only as compared to the article 96 point 1 line k) on legislatif authorities as well as article 97 point 1 line 3) on legislatif initiative which government hold the delegation authorized only by the parliament to initiate legislation and in regards to the general rules and regulations for the requisition and expropriation for public utility; furthermore to enact the Voluntary Arbitration Legal Regime for its citizens.

AbstractThis article deals with the new rules—and court practice—for the hearing of disputes involving foreigners in state arbitration (commercial) courts of the Russian Federation. It is these courts that have been entrusted with the administration of justice in cases involving entrepreneurship as well as other business and commercial activity in Russia.The author examines, inter alia, questions of the legal status of foreign persons in Russian courts, as well as the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and court judgments. He also analyzes the mutual relationship between Russian law and international treaties to which Russia is a party that deal with the participation of foreign persons in arbitration courts.

Abstract In the past decade, the number of investment tribunals wrestling with allegations of investor illegality and corrupt conduct has soared. Much has been said and written about corruption in investment arbitration, but the treatment and import of objections on the basis of an investor’s illegal conduct other than corruption has not received equal attention. This article seeks to fill that void through a comprehensive, methodical review of investment awards to date that have grappled with the issue. Allegations of investor misconduct are richly diverse, ranging from the wilful disregard of local foreign investment restrictions to inadvertent administrative omissions a host State knowingly elected not to enforce. Recognizing that the factual matrices giving rise to the illegality objection are highly fact-specific, this article explores the contours of the illegality objection, its typology, the analytical framework tribunals apply, the evolving and competing applicable legal standards, the scenarios when illegality is fatal to jurisdiction or admissibility (or not), and the relevance of the State’s conduct in perhaps overcoming that death knell.

Claims and disputes are considered an inevitable consequence of the construction process, and project participants are becoming more aware of their costly and lengthy resolution process. The conditions of contract normally include procedures for the submittal, administration and resolution of claims, while it is widely recognized that attempting to resolve claims/disputes through amicable settlement as opposed to arbitration or litigation can save on a lot of time and money. This paper presents a critical analysis of the windows of opportunities offered under both the 1987 and 1999 FIDIC conditions of contract for attempting to resolve claims/disputes amicably. It first focuses on the 56-day period specifically dedicated for attempting an amicable resolution of disputes and highlights the possibilities of effectively stretching this period in more than one way. It further explores the opportunities available at the earlier stages of the claim/dispute timeline, before a claim is escalated to the level of a dispute.

Purpose This study aims to investigate why anti-corruption statutes are not efficient in Nigeria’s upstream petroleum industry. Design/methodology/approach This study is a doctrinal legal research that embraces a point-by-point comparative methodology with a library research technique. Findings This study reveals that corruption strives on feeble implementation of anti-corruption legal regime and the absence of political will in offering efficient regulatory intervention. Finally, this study finds that anti-corruption organisations in Nigeria are not efficient due to non-existence of the Federal Government’s political will to fight corruption, insufficient funds and absence of stringent implementation of the anti-corruption legal regime in the country. Research limitations/implications Investigations reveal during this study that Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) operations are characterised with poor record-keeping, lack of accountability as well as secrecy in the award of oil contracts, oil licence, leases and other financial transactions due to non-disclosure or confidentiality clauses contained in most of these contracts. Also, an arbitration proceeding limit access to their records and some of these agreements under contentions. This has also limited the success of this research work and generalising its findings. Practical implications This study recommends, among other reforms, soft law technique and stringent execution of anti-corruption statutes. This study also recommends increment in financial appropriation to Nigeria’s anti-corruption institutions, taking into consideration the finding that a meagre budget is a drawback. Social implications This study reveals that corruption strives on feeble implementation of anti-corruption legal regime and the absence of political will in offering efficient regulatory intervention. Corruption flourishes due to poor enforcement of anti-corruption laws and the absence of political will in offering efficient regulatory intervention by the government. Originality/value The study advocates the need for enhancement of anti-corruption agencies' budgets taking into consideration the finding that meagres budgets are challenge of the agencies.

In India Courts are overburdened with litigations. There are so many reasons for over burdening but one of the good reason is that proportionately to the case number of courts are less, and applications of procedural law consumes lot of time and it result into delay. “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied” that is the reason people usually frustrate by litigations in India. Recently there is a good realization amounts all stockholders of law that there should be quick disposal of cases and prompt justice delivered system. Considering this aspect, to lessen the burden of court alternate dispute resolution system is encouraged and having good result in the form of mediation and arbitration. Even civil courts under section 18 resort to settle the matter through mediation. In criminal arbitration of justice now fast track courts are doing very good role and delay in criminal trials to some extent is minimize may not be fully controlled. But for that we have to give credit to Supreme Court of India by giving directions in number of Public interest Litigation started from Hussainara Khatun & Others Vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar ( 1979 AIR 1369,1979 SCR(3)532). There is also a one thought to introduce plea bargaining in India. Plea bargain usually occurs any time before verdict is passed. Good thing about Plea Bargain is that it concludes a criminal case without a trial. PLEA BARGAINING IN INDIA Prior to the Criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2005 the concept of Plea Bargain was totally unknown. In state of UP vs Chandrika( AIR 2000SC 164) and Kripalsingh Vs State of Haryana 2000(1) Crimes 53 (SC). Supreme Court of India observed that the concept of Plea Bargaining is against the Public Policy and further said that neither that trial Courts nor High Court has Jurisdiction to bypass the minimum sentence prescribed by the law. Before proceeding to plea bargaining the concept now started introducing in India, it would be good known what is pleas bargaining. There is no perfect or simple definition of Plea Bargaining. Simply we can put it and say that a plea bargaining is a contractual bargaining between the prosecution and in defendant accused concerning disposition of a criminal charge. However, unlike other contractual obligations it is not enforceable until a Judge approved it. From the point of view accused means who trends conviction and demand lesser sentence where he likely to be convicted. As researcher written about that the Plea bargaining, introduced in India from the year 2005 and not earlier. But there are certain provisions n earlier Acts also i.e. provision in chapter XXI of Crpc. The same has taken place through amendment I criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2005 and came into the effect from July 2005. Recognizing that there are significant differences in criminal procedures as well as in the role and status of various agencies in different countries, the Act does not give recognition to any existing practice akin to plea-bargaining. Instead, it lays down procedures with a distinct feature of enabling an accused to an application for plea bargaining in the court where the trial is pending. The Act further requires the court after receiving the application, must examine the accused in camera to ascertain whether the application has been filed voluntarily. Once the court is convinced that the accused is participating, in the plea-bargain voluntarily, the court must then issue notice to the Public prosecutor or the complainant to work out a mutually satisfactory disposition of the case. The negotiation of such a mutually acceptable settlement is left to the free will of the prosecution (including the victim) and the accused. If a settlement is reached, the court can award compensation based on it to the victim and then hear the parties on the issue of punishment. The Court may release the accused on probation if the law allows for it; if a minimum sentence is provided for the offence committed’ the accused may be sentenced to half of such minimum punishment; above, then the accused may be sentences to one fourth of the punishment provided or extendable for such offences. The accused may also avail of the benefit under section 428 of the code of criminal Procedure, 1973 which allows setting of the period of detention undergone by the accused against the sentence of imprisonment in plea bargained settlement. The court must deliver the Judgement in open Court according to the terms of the mutually agreed disposition and formula prescribed for sentencing including victim Compensation. IT may be noted that this Judgement is final and no appeal lies apart from a writ petition to the State high Court under article 226 and 226 of the Constitution or a special leave petition to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. IN addition to above the Act also provides: • If the accused is a first time offender, the court will have the option of releasing him/her on probation. Alternatively, the court may grant half the minimum punishment for the particular offence. • The plea-bargaining is applicable only in respect of those offences for which punishment of imprisonment is up to a period of 7 years; it does not apply where such offence affect the socio-economic condition of the country or has been committed against a woman or a child below the age of 14 years; • The application for plea – bargaining should be filed by the accused voluntarily; • The statement or facts stated by an accused in an application for plea-bargaining shall not be used for any other purpose other than for plea bargaining; This was the concept of plea bargaining, in a nutshell, as included in Indian Criminal Justice Process. It would be pertinent here to understand how different the above process is from the plea bargaining as practiced in United States. In India rate of conviction is not high, on the contrary acquittal rate is more i.e. why accused do not resort to plea-bargaining. Because in plea bargaining once you accept guilt, conviction is must. When most of the accused are told that the will be acquitted by court they usually do not come forward for plea bargaining. Therefore unless and until conviction rate is not become higher, there will not be good result of plea bargaining what actually was happened in USA same cannot be happened in India immediately. The need of the time is to revamp criminal administration of the justice.