International Legal Cooperation Now Integral To Judiciary, Says Justice Surya Kant

Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant on Friday highlighted the increasing relevance of cross-border legal collaboration, stating that international legal cooperation is no longer merely aspirational but has become an essential part of daily judicial functioning.

“Let us remember that justice is not a commodity to be hoarded within national borders; it is a universal aspiration. The comity of courts and international legal cooperation are instruments by which we move closer to that aspiration,” Justice Kant said while addressing the annual litigation conference titled ‘Comity of Courts and International Legal Cooperation in Practice’, PTI reported. 

In today’s interconnected world, litigation, too, has assumed a transnational character, he noted. “No longer do disputes confine themselves within the neat boundaries of sovereign states. Assets may be held in Singapore, evidence may rest on servers in Ireland, witnesses may reside in Canada, while the cause of action arises in India. The question then arises -- how do we, as guardians of justice, prevent this interconnectedness from turning into entanglement,” he asked.

Justice Kant asserted that the principle of comity of courts offers a solution. He clarified that this principle does not imply the surrender of sovereignty, but rather stands for mutual respect, coordination, and trust between the judiciaries of different nations. “Without it, cross-border dispute resolution risks descending into chaos: conflicting judgments, endless forum shopping, and erosion of faith in the rule of law. With comity, however, we create predictability, fairness, and efficiency for litigants who are already navigating the emotional and financial strains of disputes. International legal cooperation is no longer aspirational; it is now a part of our daily judicial lives,” he said.

To illustrate the growing embrace of such cooperation, Justice Kant referred to the cross-border insolvency case of Jet Airways (India) Ltd vs State Bank of India (2019). In this case, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) recognised parallel insolvency proceedings in the Netherlands and directed cooperation between Indian and Dutch administrators, a move he described as “a significant step toward cross-border insolvency cooperation.”

Justice Kant acknowledged the significant challenges that come with cross-border legal collaboration, such as conflicting sovereignties, technological complexities, and cultural and normative differences. He underscored the need to build a more cooperative global judiciary by institutionalising regular bilateral and multilateral exchanges between judiciaries to foster mutual understanding and trust, which, he said, form the bedrock of comity. He also emphasised the importance of prioritising training for judges and lawyers in comparative jurisprudence, international conventions, and foreign legal systems. Furthermore, he advocated for the use of digital platforms to facilitate mutual legal assistance, evidence sharing, and even virtual hearings involving parties from different jurisdictions. Establishing a global repository of case studies and judicial approaches to cross-border issues, he said, could also serve as a valuable reference point for courts worldwide.

Reflecting on the broader pursuit of justice, Justice Kant observed that too often, the emphasis on procedural precision can come at the expense of substantive fairness. “Justice, if it becomes the handmaid of procedure, obviously ceases to inspire trust. This spirit must guide international cooperation as dispensation of justice must never be defeated by the tyranny of technicalities,” he said.

With PTI inputs