Abstract

This article discusses the emerging necessity of an exclusive institutionalized arbitration process to adjudicate issues of Intellectual Property (IP) disputes in India since there is an increase in cross-border enforcement, innovation-centered sectors, and inefficiencies of conventional litigation. Although India has created IP benches in certain High Courts, and pre-institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, its current system is still not adequate in dealing with such complexity and urgency of IP cases especially in connection with trade secrets, licensing, royalties, and co-existence agreements. The article discusses the arbitrability of IP disputes in India citing leading judgments of Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc v. SBI Home Finance Ltd and Hero Electric Vehicles Pvt Ltd v. Lectro E-Mobility Pvt Ltd and compares the same with Indian laws with a more advanced system in Singapore, the UK and the USA. Central to the proposal lies World Intellectual Property Organization- Arbitration and Mediation Center (WIPO AMC) which has a track record of a widely respected and functional model of sector-specific dispute resolution that involves factors such as procedural flexibility, confidentiality, and panels of experienced arbitrators. The article posts a structural deficit in India where only arbitral institutions such as MCIA, DIAC, and ICA do not have specialized IP procedures and IP specialists. It proposes establishment of exclusive IP arbitration court or appointing IP expertise in the current existing courts, but with infrastructure support of platforms such as DPIIT and FICCI. The policy recommendations are writing the model IP arbitration clauses, multi-stakeholder consultations and promoting capacity building. Finally, institutionalization of IP arbitration in India will not only free up the huge pendency in the courts but it will also ensure innovation, build investor confidence and improve India as a major player in cross-border dispute resolution. India can enhance its commitment to enforce IPs effectively and adjudicate efficiently by joining best international practices and developing sustainable, domestic-tailored framework.

Keywords