Summary

Introduction

On 6 February 2025 the Republic of India ("India") commenced this arbitration claim against three companies incorporated in the Republic of Mauritius (the "Mauritian Companies"), described in the claim form as CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd (in administration), Telcom Devas Mauritius Limited (in administration) and Devas Employees Mauritius Private Limited (in administration). The Mauritian Companies are shareholders in an Indian company, Devas Multimedia Private Ltd ("Devas India"), which is now in liquidation in India.

The arbitration with which this claim is concerned (the "Arbitration", also known as the "BIT-2 Arbitration") is PCA Case No 2022-34 in which the Mauritian Companies are the claimants and India is the respondent. It was commenced on 2 February 2022 under the terms of a bilateral treaty for the protection of investments made between India and the Republic of Mauritius on 4 September 1998 (the "BIT").

The Arbitration is seated in London, and the arbitration agreement incorporates the 1976 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (the "1976 UNCITRAL Rules") as specified by Article 8(2)(d) of the BIT. The arbitration tribunal (the "Tribunal") originally comprised three arbitrators: Professor Eduardo Zuleta (presiding arbitrator), Professor Dr Stephan Schill, and Justice Goda Raghuram. The presiding arbitrator resigned for medical reasons on 8 August 2025 and has now been replaced.

At the outset of the Arbitration, each of the Mauritian Companies was represented by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher UK LLP ("Gibson Dunn"), who had been empowered to act pursuant to a New York law power of attorney executed on behalf of each of the Mauritian Companies by a director immediately before the Arbitration commenced. It was not in issue that each of the powers of attorney was validly entered into by each of the Mauritian Companies at the time of its execution.

Just over a year after the commencement of the Arbitration, Mr Yuvraj Thacoor ("Mr Thacoor") was appointed by the Supreme Court of Mauritius to be the administrator of each of the Mauritian Companies. In circumstances which I shall explain in more detail in due course, the Tribunal does not recognise Mr Thacoor as the representative of the Mauritian Companies or as a party in the Arbitration. The representation of the Mauritian Companies is at the heart of the matter with which this claim is concerned.

...