The Draft Rules promise an efficient procedural framework, but they operate within the broader ecosystem of arbitration with several other considerations involved.

In this piece, the author argues that the decision of the SC in Disortho has two main problems. First, the court fails to appropriately decide the seat. Second, the law laid down by the SC is problematic due to its misconceived implementation of party intention and the principle of separability. 

It is argued that the SC could have explored other possible remedies, such as sending the resolution plan back to CoC to remedy the non-compliances and imposing penalties on responsible entities.