clear
Amit Sibal (India)

Amit Sibal (India)

Practice Overview

Amit is a Senior Advocate (equivalent to KC in India) appearing regularly at the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and various other High Courts and Tribunals across India.  He is ranked as a leading practitioner for dispute resolution by Chambers & Partners Asia-Pacific Guide. He was admitted to the New York Bar in 1997 and practised as a transactional lawyer in banking, insolvency and capital markets for six years at the New York and Hong Kong offices of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, one of the world’s largest international law firms. Amit was admitted to the Indian Bar in 2002 and after twelve years of practice, was designated a Senior Advocate in 2014, at the age of 39.

Amit has a substantial practice in commercial and corporate disputes and international commercial arbitration which is informed by his understanding of the financial and commercial underpinnings of complex litigation, drawing from his experience as a corporate lawyer in cross-border transactions.  He also acts in domestic arbitration and court proceedings arising out of arbitration, including disputes over reference to arbitration and constitution of tribunals, and challenges to domestic and foreign awards. Amit accepts engagements as counsel and arbitrator and is frequently engaged as an expert witness in international commercial arbitration. Amit was appointed as Member of the Inaugural IAAF Disciplinary Tribunal for the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) from 2017 to 2019.  He has sat as an arbitrator in proceedings brought under the Anti-Doping Rules of the IAAF.  He is on the International Panel of Arbitrators and Mediators with Sport Resolutions, a UK-based dispute resolution service for sport operating globally.

In a multi-disciplinary and multi-jurisdictional practice spanning across not just commercial law, but also constitutional and administrative law, competition law, insolvency, intellectual property, entertainment law, election law, sports law, criminal law, and regulatory law including the pharmaceuticals, broadcast, telecom, banking and petroleum sectors, Amit has acted as lead counsel in several leading cases.

After graduating with a BA in Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Balliol College, Oxford and a BA in law at Trinity College, Cambridge, Amit completed an LL.M. at Harvard Law School.  Amit was a co-editor of the Harvard Human Rights Journal.

Amit is regularly invited to speak at seminars and webinars on various topics including to conduct a Masterclass in Arbitration Advocacy as SIAC Faculty.  He has co-authored a chapter on “Restitutionary Damages and Account of Profits” for the upcoming book titled “Law of Damages and Expert Evidence for Commercial Disputes in India” to be published by Thomson Reuters.

  • Acted for Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC in a SIAC international commercial arbitration against Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. and Future Retail Ltd. involving claims for breach of contract in excess of US$1.7 billion and associated proceedings before the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (the appellate forum for competition cases), where the Supreme Court of India has held for the first time that emergency arbitral awards are enforceable in India and that Court orders arising out of arbitration proceedings are not appealable unless an appeal is specifically provided for under the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [(2022) 1 SCC 209]
  • Engaged to provide expert opinion on Indian contract and trademark laws in an international commercial arbitration involving entities in the United States and India
  • Deposed as an expert witness on the foreign exchange laws of India in a Singapore-seated SIAC arbitration
  • Acted for an international investment fund in a London-seated Bilateral Investment Treaty arbitration involving claims in excess of US$220 Million
  • Acted for a market leading fintech company in India, in a Delhi-seated SIAC emergency arbitration involving disputes with a founder-shareholder
  • Acted for a subsidiary of a South African corporation in an arbitration against the GVK group, a leading developer and manager of airports in India, in a dispute arising out of a shareholders agreement regarding transferability of shares and rights of first refusal, involving claims in excess of US$150 million
  • Acted for a major wind power generation company and its group companies in an arbitration arising out of a dispute between shareholders
  • Acted for Vale Australia Pty Ltd., a major Australian mining company, in ICC arbitration proceedings against Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL), an Indian public sector corporation in a claim of damages in excess of US$150 million
  • Acted for a leading auto manufacturer in India, in arbitration proceedings in a contractual dispute with a leading aluminum producer in India
  • Acted for a leading Indian real estate developer, in arbitration proceedings against an infrastructure development company
  • Acted for a leading Indian manufacturer of automotive components in arbitration proceedings against a Japanese supplier of automotive service parts
  • Acted as an Arbitrator in proceedings brought under the Anti-Doping Rules of the IAAF
  • Acted for the insolvency resolution professional in a case before the Supreme Court of India where the Supreme Court held for the first time that Section 29A and Section 35(1)(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 which prohibits the return of erstwhile management to the helm of a company admitted to insolvency, also applies to a scheme of compromise or arrangement when the company is undergoing liquidation under the Insolvency and bankruptcy Code, 2016 [(2021) 7 SCC 474]
  • Acted for PSA Mumbai Investments PTE Ltd. in a case where the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision not to appoint an arbitrator on the ground that there did not exist any binding agreement between the parties [(2018) 10 SCC 525]
  • Acted for individual farmers whose lands were acquired by the government to build highways. Supreme Court of India held that owners of lands acquired by the government to build highways under the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 were entitled to the same compensation as owners of lands acquired for other purposes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and upheld the striking down of a provision of the 1988 Act [(2019) 9 SCC 304] [pro bono]
  • Acted for Weatherford Oil Tool Middle East Ltd. against Baker Hughes Singapore PTE Ltd. before the Supreme Court of India and succeeded in appointment of an arbitrator where the arbitration agreement was unstamped/insufficiently stamped and inadmissible as evidence under the [Indian] Stamp Act [2022 SCC OnLine SC 1464]
  • Acted for Rishabh Enterprises before the Supreme Court of India and Delhi High Court culminating in a leading case on the application of the Group of Companies doctrine to refer disputes with non-signatories to arbitration [(2018) 15 SCC 678]
  • Acted for Standard Chartered Bank before the Supreme Court of India on what has become a leading case on the issue of compliance with the conditions for invocation of unconditional bank guarantees [(2020) 13 SCC 574]
  • Acted for the sister company of Jaypee Infratech Ltd. (Corporate Debtor, company undergoing insolvency) before the Supreme Court of India on the issue of whether the Corporate Debtor’s property mortgaged to secure a loan facility of the sister concern would revert to the Corporate Debtor free of mortgage on the completion/resolution of the corporate insolvency process under Indian insolvency law [(2020) 8 SCC 401]
  • Acted for citizens of Mount Abu before the National Green Tribunal and the Supreme Court to protect the ecologically rich desert hill station from environmental degradation from commercial projects. [(2022) 11 SCC 493] [pro bono]
  • Acted for Zostel Hospitality Pvt., a leading chain of hotels and travellers’ hostels, before the Supreme Court of India for appointment of arbitrator in a dispute arising from their business transfer and share-purchase agreement [(2021) 9 SCC 765]
  • Acted for the Resolution Professional of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. in insolvency proceedings before the Supreme Court of India seeking classification and computation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Costs
  • Acted for a leading real estate company in its dispute with homebuyers before the Supreme Court of India regarding excess amount charged for increase in super area/common area of apartments [MANU/SC/0906/2023]
  • Acting for SpiceJet, a leading commercial airline operator, before the Delhi High Court in a challenge to an arbitral award and execution proceedings arising out of a share purchase agreement
  • Acted for Raj Corporation Pvt. Ltd., a road construction company in a challenge to a debarment order by the National Highways Authority of India arising from commercial disputes where the Delhi High Court quashed the debarment order [2021 SCC OnLine Del 4857]
  • Acted for SARE subsidiary companies before the Delhi High Court, resisting orders of injunction against the parent company i.e. SARE Public Company Ltd. which was acting through the receiver appointed by its lender. The issue was whether the corporate veil could be lifted and the entire SARE group could be considered as a single economic unit [2020 SCC Online Del 17]
  • Acted for a river bed dredging company, before the Delhi High Court where the issue was mala fide discharge of a tender issued by the Water Treatment and Sewage Department of the Delhi Government [2023 SCC OnLine Del 3159]
  • Acted for Durgapur Freight Terminal Pvt. Ltd., a railway freight terminal company in a shareholding and representation dispute where the Delhi High Court laid down the law on territorial jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition [MANU/DE/1260/2023]
  • Acting for Aircraft lessors in proceedings before the Delhi High Court for recovery of aircraft by lessors to a leading airline (GoAir) contending that de-registration (and recovery) of aircraft on termination of leases cannot be impeded by pendency of insolvency proceedings/moratorium on recovery of property of company undergoing insolvency, in view of the Aircraft Act 1994, the Aircraft Rules and the Cape Town Convention [2023 SCC OnLine Del 4692]
  • Acted for Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., a Government of India public sector undertaking before the Delhi High Court involving the issue of jurisdiction to maintain a civil suit despite the existence of an arbitration clause and the effect of alleged fraud [2020 SCC OnLine Del 616]
  • Acted for a subsidiary of a South African corporation against the GVK group on the issue of interim relief based on rights of first refusal pending initiation of arbitration proceedings [2019 SCC OnLine Del 8978]
  • Acted in the matter of Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. v. Anish Nanawati, on behalf of Assets Care and Reconstruction Enterprise Ltd. where the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal held that mere security interest created by a mortgage does not constitute a final debt [MANU/NL/1167/2022]
  • Acting for a real estate developer in disputes with a landowner and proceedings for interim reliefs prior to commencement of arbitral proceedings and appointment of an arbitrator, where the landowner alleges disputes are non-arbitrable due to allegations of serious fraud
  • Acted for a joint venture partner against McDonald’s Corporation in appeals arising out of proceedings for oppression and mismanagement under Company law
  • Acted for Reliance Communications Ltd. and Aircel Ltd. in litigation regarding payment of exit amounts upon termination of service agreements
  • Acted for the joint venture partner of McDonald’s Corporation in a challenge to the arbitral award and associated proceedings arising out of a London-seated LCIA arbitration against McDonald’s
  • Acted for DSC Ventures, a leading highway construction company, against a statutory corporation in a dispute over termination of the mandate of the arbitrator and appointment of a substituted arbitrator before the Delhi High Court [2020 SCC OnLine Del 669]Acted for Tata Sons in its dispute with the late Cyrus Mistry before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in relation to management of the Tatas’ flagship company [MANU/NL/0640/2019]
  • Acted for a major wind power generation company and its group companies in an arbitration arising out of a dispute between shareholders
  • Acted for Vale Australia Pty Ltd., a major Australian mining company, in arbitration proceedings against Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL), an Indian public sector corporation in a claim of damages in excess of US$150 million
  • Acting for Resolution Professional of KSK Water Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. in disputes with KSK Mahanadi Power Company Ltd. before the Supreme Court of India regarding payment of contractual dues (Take or Pay obligations) during the pendency of the resolution process of both entities
  • Acting for Thiess Minecs India Pvt. Ltd., a mining company, before the Delhi High Court in a challenge to an arbitral award arising out of a Coal Block Development and Operation ProjectActed for Videocon Industries Ltd., a major Indian supplier of natural gas, in proceedings regarding the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award in the Delhi High Court [2012 (129) DRJ 396]
  • Acting for a city gas network service provider in disputes with the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board before the Delhi High Court and the Regulator regarding rejection of its bids for certain territories
  • Acted for Cairn India Ltd. in proceedings regarding the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award in the Delhi High Court
  • Acted for MBL Infrastructure Ltd., a construction contractor, before the Delhi High Court, in successfully challenging rejection of amendments to the Statement of Claim in arbitration proceedings, [MANU/DE/2991/2023]
  • Acted for Pink City Expressway Pvt. Ltd. in disputes with the National Highway Authority of India before the Delhi High Court regarding termination of a Concession Agreement and whether interim relief can be granted prior to commencement of arbitration where the agreement is alleged to be determinable in its nature [2022 SCC OnLine Del 1714]
  • Acted for Uber Inc., before the Supreme Court of India in Samir Agarwal v. CCI. The Court affirmed that any individual, even without personal loss, can submit information alleging a violation of the Competition Act to the Competition Commission of India (CCI), triggering an inquiry [(2021) 3 SCC 136]
  • Acted for Uber Inc., in a number of cases before the CCI and NCLAT relating to abuse of dominant position in the market of radio taxi services [MANU/CO/0041/2021] [MANU/CO/0012/2016]
  • Acted for Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd., a leading mobile services provider, before the Supreme Court of India. The case highlighted the complex interplay between competition law and sector-specific regulatory authorities in India and set a precedent regarding the limits of the CCI’s authority in sectors already regulated by specialized regulatory bodies [(2019) 2 SCC 521]
  • Acted for SCM Soilfert before the Supreme Court of India where the law relating to gun jumping, i.e., failure to notify a transaction to the CCI was laid down. The Court also held that CCI is not required to demonstrate mens rea or intentional breach as an essential element for imposing penalty [(2018) 6 SCC 631]
  • Acted for Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings before Supreme Court of India, CCI and NCLAT (appellate forum for competition cases from Competition Commission of India) on the issue of approval of combination and power of the regulator to monitor the working of such combination [MANU/NL/0374/2022]
  • Acted for the lead Petitioner, Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, in a challenge to the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 [2019 SCC OnLine Del 8032]
  • Acted for Culver Max Entertainment Private Ltd. (Sony) in proceedings before the CCI for approval of the US$10 billion merger of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. with Sony Pictures Networks India [MANU/CO/0093/2022]
  • Acted for Apollo Tyres Ltd. in a case related to cartelization of sale and supply of tyres in India. The NCLAT remanded the case back to CCI due to errors in its order [2021 SCC OnLine CCI 53]
  • Acted for Epic Games Inc. in a case against Google LLC before NCLAT involving allegations of abuse of market dominance, unfair trade practices and other anti-trust violations. The case raises questions about how competition laws and regulations should apply to the rapidly evolving digital economy [2023 SCC OnLine NCLAT 147]
  • Acted on behalf of WhatsApp Inc., in a case relating to abuse of dominance position by a Facebook-owned entity. NCLAT upheld the dismissal of the complaint which alleged that WhatsApp is violating competition laws by way of an update which was in breach of the Information Technology Act [2022 SCC OnLine NCLAT 4234]
  • Acted for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) before the CCI. The case highlighted the intersection of competition law and sports administration, raising questions about how sports bodies balance their authority with the principles of fair competition in the market [MANU/CO/0078/2017]
  • Acted for the International Hockey Federation (FIH) where the CCI rejected a complaint filed by former Olympian and National Hockey Players alleging that Hockey India abused its dominant position and indulged in various anti- competitive practices relating to the organization of World Series Hockey League [MANU/CO/0033/2013]
  • Acted for Super Cassettes Ltd., India’s leading media entertainment company, before the CCI in a case involving dispute regarding alleged anti-competitive practices in the music industry. The case is significant as it reflects the intersection of competition law and the media and entertainment industry in India [MANU/CO/0080/2014]
  • Acted for United Breweries Ltd. before the CCI in a case related to cartelization of sale and supply of beer in certain states of India [2021 SCC OnLine CCI 53]
  • Acted for Shree Cements Ltd. in a case related to cartelization of sale and supply of cement in India. The case raises important issue regarding jurisdiction of CCI to investigate cases which were being investigated by erstwhile Monopolies & Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Commission
  • Acted for International Spirits and Wines Association of India (ISWAI) before the CCI in a case concerning abuse of dominant position by a statutory body corporate in the market for procurement of alcoholic beverages in the State of Uttarakhand [2021 SCC OnLine CCI 15]
  • Acted for Bard Healthcare in the first case where the right of drug manufacturers to increase the price of drugs outside price control by 10% annually was interpreted and upheld [2022 SCC OnLine Del 3052]
  • Advised and acted for BCCI and its officers in litigation before the FEMA Appellate Tribunal relating to the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) and the FEMA regulations
  • Acted for a Coca Cola group company in a case where the Supreme Court of India examined for the first time the application of food safety laws to additives used in soft drinks and advertising of soft drinks [2013 (13) SCALE 210]
  • Acted for a society of schools before the Delhi High Court where the issue was whether a society that has exemption under the Income Tax Act, would be entitled to run its schools without having to pay additional charges to the Delhi Development Authority in respect of the increased Floor Area Ratio or upgradation charges [2023 SCC Online Del 3595]
  • Acting for educational institutions before the Delhi High Court in issues arising out of regulation of fees in schools
  • Acted as amicus curiae in proceedings relating to the regulation of inter-country relative adoptions, culminating in a landmark judgment on cross-border adoptions in India. [PKH v Central Adoption Resource Authority 2016 SCC Online Del 3918]
  • Acted for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) before the Supreme Court of India where the Court settled the issue of the extent to which a state broadcaster could monetize the compulsory live feed of important cricket events, by re-transmission on its terrestrial and DTH network [(2018) 11 SCC 700]
  • Acted for Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., India’s leading media entertainment company, before the Supreme Court of India in a dispute pertaining to compulsory licenses where the Court held that Section 31 of the Copyright Act did not grant power to the Copyright Board to grant an interim compulsory license. The judgment also laid down broad principles governing under what circumstances tribunals should grant interim relief and how far the powers of statutory tribunals to grant such reliefs extend [(2012) 5 SCC 488]
  • Acted for Netflix Inc. in proceedings seeking permanent injunction against streaming of TV series ‘Trial by Fire’ before the Delhi High Court, raising important questions about the contours of freedom of speech [2023 SCC OnLine Del 121]
  • Acted for Phoenixplay Tech India, an Online Fantasy Game based mobile application, in a case involving the contours of personality rights/right to publicity of notable Indian cricketers before the Delhi High Court.  The Court held that the use of a player’s name, image, and other performance data in NFTs does not amount to infringement of their personality rights. The landmark ruling balanced personality rights with freedom of speech and expression [2023 SCC OnLine Del 306]
  • Acted for Elsevier Ltd., Wiley Periodicals LLC and American Chemical Society, the world’s largest publishers of scientific books and journals, before the Delhi High Court in disputes pertaining to infringement of their copyright in scientific articles and journals against SciHub and Libgen
  • Acted for Biocon Biologics Ltd. and Mylan Inc. before the Delhi High Court in relation to proceedings initiated by Roche Products India Pvt. Ltd. where the issue was whether Biocon’s CANMab and Mylan’s Hertraz are biosimilar to Roche’s Trastuzumab [2016 SCC OnLine Del 2572] ; [2019 SCC OnLine Del 10151]
  • Acting for Merck Specialities Pvt. Ltd. before the Delhi High Court where the issue is whether a drug could be considered as a biosimilar of the biologics without the clinical trial data being made public
  • Acted for Lupin Ltd. before the Delhi High Court where the court held that ceiling price of Dry Powder Inhalers were not computed in accordance with the provisions of Drug Price Control Order [2019 SCC OnLine Del 8509]
  • Acting for Microsoft Corporation in proceedings brought by an Indian entity seeking rectification of Microsoft’s Azure mark registered for its cloud computing services
  • Acted for Su-Kam Power Systems in the Delhi High Court in the leading case on the standards that must be met for grant of summary judgment [(2019) 264 DLT 326]
  • Acted for Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., India’s leading leading media entertainment company, before the Delhi High Court in proceedings against radio broadcasters for their failure to comply with the mandatory requirements under law to avail the benefit of a valid statutory license to broadcast songs [(2021) 285 DLT 710
  • Acted in Hero Motorcorp Limited v. Shree Amba Industries, where the Delhi High Court held that definition of ‘Article’ under the Design Act would only include articles that can be sold as articles that have an independent life as articles of commerce and not merely as substitutes/accessories [MANU/DE/5244/2023]
  • Acted for HFCL Ltd., a leading telecommunications company, before the Delhi High Court, in a matter relating to alleged infringement of patent related to optical fiber cable [(2023) 298 DLT 366]
  • Acted for Intex Technologies and Micromax Informatics Ltd., leading Indian cellphone manufacturers, before Delhi High Court, in proceedings relating to infringement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) used in 2G, 3G and 4G devices
  • Acting for Natco Pharma Ltd. before the Delhi High Court, in a matter where the question of law involved the alleged ever greening of the statutory monopoly granted to the patentee (Boehringer Ingelheim) by means of securing multiple patents for the same invention
  • Acted for MakeMyTrip, India’s largest online travel portal, before the Delhi High Court in trademark infringement proceedings against Booking.com and Google on the issue of Defendant’s use of the Plaintiff’s trademark as a keyword for advertising on Google Ads platform [MANU/DE/1512/2022]
  • Acted for ICC Development (International) Ltd. (IDIL) and ESPN Star Sports before the Delhi High Court against New Delhi Television Ltd., a major cable news company for the telecast of footage of cricket matches beyond the scope of fair use exception
  • Acted for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) before Delhi High Court where the question was whether BCCI could claim copyright over contemporaneous score updates sent by defendants via SMS to mobile phones [2013 (54) PTC 222 (Del)]
  • Acted for Diageo Brands B.V. in a design infringement action concerning shape of a bottle before the Delhi High Court. The decision highlights the importance of protecting unique design configurations and lays down the test for design infringement [2022 SCC OnLineDel 2350]
  • Acted for Mobi Antenna Technologies (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. in a case where the Delhi High Court examined in detail the issues arising in a suit for patent infringement and held that when a substantial, tenable and credible challenge is raised to a patent, the plaintiff is not entitled to interim injunction [187 (2012) DLT 632]
  • Acted for Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. in a case where the High Court laid down the principles governing copyright infringement on an internet website (MySpace) which allows upload of user-generated content for commercial gain, and the extent to which the safe harbours provided by the Information Technology Act, 2000 apply [(2011) 48 PTC 49 (Del)]
  • Acted for Heinz India Private Ltd. before the Delhi High Court in a suit arising from alleged disparagement, infringement and unfair trade practices. The Court amongst other things affirmed that advertisement/commercial speech was speech protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and therefore can only be subject to regulations that are reasonable [(2019) 256 DLT 468]
  • Acted in JA Entertainment v. Sithara Entertainment, a leading case in which the Delhi High Court clarifies the status and rights of remade films under the copyright law [2022 SCC OnLine Del 1987]
  • Acted for HT Media Ltd., a leading print and electronic media house, before Delhi High Court in a suit for defamation against it and one of its journalists brought by a social media influencer
  • Acted for Natco Pharma Ltd., a leading pharmaceutical manufacturer, before the Delhi High Court in proceedings pertaining to the procedure followed by the Indian Patent Office while disposing of pre-grant oppositions under the Patents Act
  • Acted for the Regents of the University of California, before the Delhi High Court, in a writ proceeding relating to rejection of a patent application by the Controller of Patents and Designs on grounds of breach of natural justice [2019 260 DLT 672]
  • Acted for Bristol Myers Squibb, a leading American pharmaceutical company, in proceedings relating to infringement of a drug patent before the Delhi High Court [2019 SCC OnLine Del 9164]
  • Acted for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., an Indian multinational pharmaceutical company, in proceedings pertaining to infringement of a drug patent, before the Delhi High Court
  • Acted for Huntsman Advanced Materials (Switzerland) Gmbh against Jay Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. before the Delhi High Court in a patent infringement suit
  • Acted for Andrew LLC, a major US mobile antennae manufacturer, Communication Components Antenna Inc., CTR Manufacturing & Technologies, Holland, Poly Medicure and Micromax etc. in proceedings regarding enforcement of patents before various fora
  • Acted for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) in a variety of matters before the Supreme Court of India and other fora relating to the governance of cricket in India, including competition law and telecom disputes and infringement of intellectual property rights [(2018) 11 SCC 700] ; [(2011) 6 SCC 617]
  • Acted for BCCI and conducted trial of a lawsuit before Delhi High Court where a challenge by a rival cricket association was made to the restrictions placed by BCCI on players restricting them from joining the league started by the rival association; obtained anti-suit injunction against proceedings by the defendant before the English High Court, which was upheld up to the Supreme Court of India
  • Acted for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and its permanent members in proceedings wherein the Supreme Court of India examined its status as a ‘State’ entity amenable to writ jurisdiction of constitutional courts and a challenge to the constitution, rules and regulations of the BCCI [(2011) 6 SCC 617]
  • Acted for BCCI in the Supreme of India Court on the issue of re-transmission of cricket matches of national importance [(2018) 11 SCC 700] ; [(2015) 6 SCC 614]
  • Acted for international sporting federations such as the International Cricket Council (ICC) and the Fédération Internationale de Hockey (FIH) before various fora including the Supreme Court of India in matters pertaining the election, governance and management of sports federations in India [(2015) 6 SCC 614] ; [MANU/ SCOR/68378/2022] ; [MANU/ DE/4995/2012] ; [MANU/ DE/0263/2015]
  • Acting for the Returning Officer of the Basketball Federation of India in a challenge to the election before the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court [MANU/DE/2876/2023]
  • Acted for Sushil Kumar, champion wrestler and the only Indian sportsperson to win two individual medals in the Olympics, against the Wrestling Federation of India [MANU/DE/1441/2016]
  • Acted for BCCI and its office bearers in a lawsuit filed by Mr. Lalit Kumar Modi challenging his removal from BCCI and the Indian Premier League
  • Acted for Mr. Sachin Tendulkar, India’s leading cricketer, before the Ethics Officer of the BCCI in an issue involving conflict of interest
  • Acted for ICC Development (International) Ltd. in the Delhi High Court on the issue of infringement of copyright and reproduction rights in broadcast of cricket matches and fair dealing in the footage of cricket matches by news broadcasters
  • Acted for the Delhi District Cricket Association (DDCA), the body that runs cricket in the State of Delhi, in a dispute before Delhi High Court involving election of its office bearers
  • Acted for the Badminton Association of India (BAI) before Delhi High Court in a dispute regarding representation of India in Asian Games, Jakarta, 2018
  • Acted for an executive member of the Karate India Organization before the Delhi High Court, in relation to his complaint against the President, Indian Olympic Association pending before the Ethics Commission, Indian Olympic Association
  • Legal 500 Bar Awards 2023: Commercial Litigation Set of the Year
  • L500-uk-top-tier-set-2024
  • Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2024: Top Tier Set
  • Chambers UK Bar 2024: Top Ranked
Winner: UK Bar Awards 2023
The Lawyer Awards 2022: Chambers of the Year