1. The costs of arbitration shall include the fees and expenses of the arbitrators and the administrative costs of the Court of Justice, fixed by the Court in accordance with the tariff in force at the time of the opening of the arbitration proceedings, as well as the fees and expenses of any experts appointed by the arbitral tribunal and the reasonable legal and other costs incurred by the parties to the arbitration. 2. The Court shall fix, as soon as possible, the advance of costs at an amount likely to cover the fees and expenses of the arbitrators and the administrative costs of the ICC for claims and counterclaims submitted to it by the parties. This amount may be adjusted at any time during the arbitration proceedings. In the case of a counter-appeal in addition to the claims, the Tribunal may impose separate advances of costs for claims and counterclaims. 2. Before the record is transmitted to the arbitral tribunal and in appropriate circumstances, the parties may apply to any competent judicial authority for interim measures of protection. A party`s request to a judicial authority to take such measures or to apply such measures, ordered by an arbitral tribunal, shall not be considered a breach or waiver of the arbitration agreement and shall not affect the powers conferred on the arbitral tribunal. Such a request and all measures taken by the judicial authority shall be immediately notified to the secretariat. The secretariat shall inform the arbitral tribunal accordingly. 1.
The parties are free to agree on the place of arbitration. If such an agreement has not been concluded, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the place of arbitration, taking into account the circumstances of each case, including the convenience of the parties. In July 2017, the Supreme Court issued its judgment in the TRF Ltd case. In light of this ruling, Bharat filed a motion with the arbitrator in October 2017 asking him to withdraw from the proceedings. The individual arbitrator dismissed the claim without justification. Bharat filed an application for the appointment of a replacement arbitrator with the Delhi Supreme Court, in accordance with sections 14 and 15 of the Act, as the current de jure arbitrator (under the law) was not in a position to act in this capacity. 5. At the end of the proceedings, the Court, instead of replacing an arbitrator who has died in accordance with Articles 12(1) and 12(2) or who has been dismissed by the Court of Justice, may decide whether it is considered appropriate for the remaining arbitrators to continue the arbitration. In making this finding, the Tribunal shall take into account the positions of the other arbitrators and the parties and any other matter it considers appropriate in the circumstances. 3. If one of the parties refuses to participate in the preparation of the performance chart or to sign it, it shall be subject to the approval of the Tribunal. If the Statute is signed or approved by the Court in accordance with Article 18( 2), the arbitration procedure shall continue.
It is common knowledge that arbitration offers greater flexibility and party autonomy compared to traditional litigation before the courts. Therefore, the agreed terms for appointing an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal must be strictly adhered to when appointing such appointments in the event of a dispute between the parties to an agreement. . . .