Commercial disputes need pragmatic, not abstract justice: CJI Gavai

Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, on Wednesday, remarked that arbitration is no longer limited to big cities and raised concerns about the increasing influence of technology in the justice delivery system. Delivering the keynote address at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) in London, on the theme ‘The Role of Courts in Upholding Rule of Law in Adjudicating Commercial Disputes’, he emphasised that over-dependence on digital tools could undermine public confidence in the judiciary and the foundational principles of the rule of law.

The CJI highlighted the enduring role of the judiciary in safeguarding the rule of law amidst rapid technological shifts.

“When technology takes the driver’s seat in legal processes, it risks eroding trust in the judiciary,” he said. “Unlike computer algorithms, the law is not designed to blindly replicate historical patterns, cater to audience preferences, or simply optimise for efficiency. It is rooted in principles, guided by reason, and most importantly, committed to fairness.”

CJI Gavai noted that the primary goal in commercial disputes is often efficiency rather than abstract notions of justice. “Judicial interpretation of commercial statutes must be pragmatic and geared towards facilitating commerce rather than impeding it,” he remarked.

"Today, arbitrators are no longer passive adjudicators but are increasingly expected to proactively address suspicions of illicit activities, even when not formally pleaded. Courts, in turn, serve both as guardians of arbitral integrity and as safety nets. The challenge is most pressing when the state is involved and public funds are at stake. In such scenarios, both arbitrators and courts must act not merely as neutral adjudicators, but as custodians of public trust," the CJI said in a panel discussion.

He also pointed to an emerging delicate tension in dispute resolution, where the growing autonomy of technological systems often operating without sufficient oversight poses new challenges for the rule of law. Courts, he said, must adopt a soft-touch supervision approach to ensure that legal processes involving such systems continue to uphold the fundamental tenets of justice.

“In this evolving landscape, judicial oversight must remain vigilant to ensure that both human and non-human actors comply with the principles central to the rule of law,” he said.

Looking ahead, the CJI proposed the formation of a Commonwealth Dream Team, a multi-disciplinary group comprising judges, lawyers, technologists, regulators, and academics to collectively address the legal challenges posed by emerging technologies.

CJI also stressed that arbitrators must maintain a delicate balance when dealing with suspicions of fraud that are not formally pleaded.

He noted that while arbitration has become a preferred mechanism for resolving commercial disputes due to its efficiency and confidentiality, it must not serve as a shield for illicit conduct.

"This concern becomes especially acute when public funds are at stake, such as when the state is a party. While arbitration is designed to be efficient and party-driven, it must not become a vehicle to shield illicit conduct from scrutiny," he said.

Speaking about the reforms needed in India’s arbitration landscape, Chief Justice Gavai stressed that an arbitral award should be the final word and not a doorway to prolonged court battles, except in cases where there is clear and manifest injustice.

“If I had a magic wand,” he said, “I would ensure a ‘final award’ truly meant final rather than being the starting line for years of post-award litigation. Arbitration is meant to be a sprint to resolution, not the first lap of a marathon.”

"Courts are also empowered to grant or enforce interim measures, such as asset freezing (interim attachment) and evidence preservation. Furthermore, as arbitral tribunals cannot compel third parties, they may depend on national courts to compel witness testimony or order depositions, particularly when witnesses are outside the tribunal's jurisdiction," CJI added.