CROSS-BORDER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS AND ARBITRATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

AUTHOR- ABHINIT PANDEY, STUDENT AT CHRIST (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY), LAVASA, PUNE

BEST CITATION – ABHINIT PANDEY, CROSS-BORDER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS AND ARBITRATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (8) OF 2026, PG. 43-49, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract:

Over the last twenty years, cross-border real estate transactions have expanded both in volume and complexity. The main factors that have contributed to this trend are globalisation, the movement of institutional capital and cross-jurisdictional development projects. One of the most common issues in disputes that result from these transactions is that the contracts can be interpreted in different ways. Besides that, other issues which are often areas of arbitration when a dispute resolution mechanism is needed, come up such as regulatory compliance, insolvency, public policy, and enforcement.

This article through a comparative legal analysis of various jurisdictions (India, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States) explores the appropriateness, benefits, and problems of arbitration in international real estate disputes. The work also assesses the cooperation between the models of the institutional framework (the UNCITRAL Model Law and the New York Convention), the realities of enforcement, and the interface of domestic regulatory systems (especially the ones related to the protection of consumers, like RERA in India) with arbitration agreements.

This research determines that arbitration is capable of guaranteeing party autonomy, procedural adaptability, and cross-border enforceability, though it is affected by jurisdictional restrictions in situations where the divide between public law and private law is quite distinct (for example, certain consumer or regulatory disputes). As a result, Singapore is considered to be a very favorable seat for arbitration with great enforcement and judicial support, the New York Convention is still the main international enforcement instrument, and India is a location that sends different signals due to the development of case law on arbitrability (especially if statutory regimes like RERA apply).

The article ends with practical recommendations to the drafting of dispute resolution clauses, selection of seats and institutions, and risk mitigation of cross-border real estate contract enforcement.

Keywords: cross-border real estate, arbitration, enforcement, New York Convention, RERA, seat of arbitration, UNCITRAL Model Law