Date: 25.03.2022
In the case of CLX v CLY and another [2022] SGHC 17, the plaintiff sought to partially set aside an arbitral award pursuant to Singapore’s Arbitration Act, on the following grounds
Date: 25.03.2022
In the recent case of Sai Wan Shipping Ltd v Landmark Line Co, Ltd. [2022] SGHC 8, the High Court set aside an award due to the breach of natural justice.
Date: 25.03.2022
In the case of PhoenixFin Pte Ltd. and others v Convexity Ltd. [2022] SGCA 17, the Court of Appeal found that the arbitral tribunal’s ruling was in breach of natural justice, outside the scope of submission and contrary to the arbitral procedure
Date: 25.03.2022
The central issue in the case of Oilive Pte Ltd. v Hunan Xiangzhong Mining Group Ltd. [2022] SGHC 43 revolves around the validity of an arbitrator's appointment. The plaintiff contended that the appointment of the arbitrator was not in accordance with the parties' agreement
Date: 25.03.2022
In CLQ v CLR [2021] SGHC(I) 15, the Singapore International Commercial Court rejected a challenge to a jurisdiction award, finding that the underlying arbitration agreement had not been repudiated by the commencement of separate legal proceedings.
Date: 25.03.2022
In Twarit Consultancy Services Pte Ltd and another v GPE (India) Ltd and others [2021] SGHC(I) 17, the plaintiff sought to set aside an arbitral award by challenging the tribunal's jurisdiction, arbitrability and breach of natural justice
Date: 21.01.22
The Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award conducted under the auspices of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre in the recent case of
Date: 21.01.2022
In BZW and another v BZV [2022] SGCA 1, the Singapore Court of Appeal (“COA”) upheld the High Court’s decision to set aside
Date: 21.01.2022
In the recent case of CMJ and another v CML and another [2021] SGHC(I) 20, the plaintiffs (CMJ) sought to set aside an award made under the rules of Singapore International Arbitration Centre, on the grounds
Date: 07.12.2021
The recent decision in The Navios Koyo [2021] SGHC 131 emphasises the importance of ascertaining and complying with the relevant jurisdiction clause
READ MORE
Date: 07.12.2021
In Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings v Anupam Mittal [2021] SGHC 244, the Singapore High Court held that the subject matter arbitrability should be determined by the law of the seat of arbitration
Date: 07.12.2021
In the recent case of CAJ & CAK v CAI [2021] SGCA 102, the Singapore Court of Appeal allowed an application to set aside an arbitral award, stating that this was a “classic case of a breach of natural justice” when
Date: 07.12.2021
In the recent case of CIP v CIQ [2021] SGHC(I) 13, the applicant sought to set aside an arbitration award on inter alia the following grounds
Date: 07.12.2021
Malaysia’s Asian International Arbitration Centre (“AIAC”) has proposed significant amendments to the AIAC i-Arbitration Rules 2018 to reflect contemporary standards and practices in international arbitration.
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
In Cheung Teck Cheong Richard and others v LVND Investments Pte Ltd [2021] SGCA 77, the Singapore Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision to stay the proceedings in favour of arbitration, finding that there was no arbitration agreement.
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
The Singapore High Court in the case of CNA v CNB and another [2021] SGHC 192, held that an application to set aside an arbitral award was not time-barred because the timeline was extended by an earlier application to correct the award.
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
The High Court in the case of CIZ v CJA [2021] SGHC 178 ruled that the tribunal must decide cases as parties put before them, not cases that parties could or should have made.
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
It was recently held, in Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and another matter [2021] SGHC(I) 10, that arbitral tribunals have a public duty to consider evidence of corruption, even if this is contrary to a prior agreement
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
In Bloomberry Resorts and Hotels Inc and another v Global Gaming Philippines LLC and another [2021] SGCA 94, the Court of Appeal held that a relief ordered by the arbitral tribunal, which required the appellants to direct their controlling shareholder
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
The new rules of the Thai Arbitration Institute (“TAI”) which take effect on 1 October 2021, provide parties with the option to resolve disputes via an expedited procedure with lower fee thresholds.
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
On 2 September 2021, with the deposit of the instrument of ratification at the UN Headquarters in New York, Honduras becomes the seventh state to the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation
READ MORE
Date: 21.10.2021
The ratification by Turkey was affected on 11 October 2021 and the Convention will enter into force for Turkey on 11 April 2022.
Date: 01.09.2021
Singapore has acceded to the Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents earlier this year and will implement the obligations under
READ MORE
Date: 05.08.2021
Together with my colleague Ms. Oksana Riabinina / Kyiv we published a “Review of Arbitration Proceedings in Ukraine” in the July issue of the Singapore Law Gazette
Date: 05.08.2021
In CBX and anor v CBZ and ors [2021] SGCA(I) 3, the Singapore Court of Appeal recently set aside the Tribunal’s awards on grounds of breach of natural justice and that the Tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction.
Date: 05.08.2021
In the case of CKG v CKH [2021] SGHC(I) 5, the arbitration concerned an agreement for the respondent to sell its timber concession interests in Indonesia to the claimant.
READ MORE
Date: 05.08.2021
In the case of CJM v CJT [2021] SGHC(I) 4, the plaintiffs sought to set aside four paragraphs of the Tribunal’s award (the “Award”),
Date: 05.08.2021
In Republic of India v Vedanta Resources Plc [2021] SGCA 50, the Singapore Court of Appeal rejected granting declaratory relief on points of law regarding confidentiality in investment treaty arbitrations.
Date: 05.08.2021
In Convexity Ltd v Phoenixfin Pte Ltd. and others [2021] SGHC 88, the Singapore High Court set aside an arbitral award on grounds of breach of natural justice, as the Tribunal allowed the introduction of an unpleaded issue for determination without the parties’ agreement.
Date: 05.08.2021
In BZV v BZW and another [2021] SGHC 60, the Singapore High Court set aside an arbitral award on the basis that there was a breach of natural justice (i.e. the fair hearing rule) as the Tribunal had failed entirely to appreciate the correct questions it had to pose to itself
Date: 05.08.2021
On 4th June 2021, Brazil acceded to the “United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation”, also known as the “Singapore Convention”.
Date: 05.08.2021
On 31st May 2021, Iraq has become the 168th signatory to the New York Convention, having previously announced its decision to accede in 2018
Date: 14.06.2021
Under common law, costs are usually assessed on either a ‘standard’ or ‘indemnity’ basis. The Singapore Court of Appeal recently held in CDM v CDP [2021] SGCA 45
Date: 14.06.2021
In the case of CEF and another v CEH [2021] SGHC 114, the Singapore High Court dismissed an application to set aside an award and refused to expand the rules of natural justice
Date: 14.06.2021
Brazil signed the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, also known as the "Singapore Convention on Mediation", on 4 June 2021. With its signature. Brazil becomes the fifty-fourth signatory to the treaty.
Up-to-date information on the Convention and its status is available on the UNCITRAL website: https://uncitral.un.org/
Date: 14.06.2021
The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) and International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) has received Russian governmental permits to administer arbitrations on 18 May 2021.
Date: 05.05.2021
The Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Singapore and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on the Promotion and Protection of Investments (“Indonesia-Singapore BIT”)
Date: 05.05.2021
On 4 March 2021, Malawi acceded to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (also commonly known as the "New York" Convention)
READ MORE
Date: 05.05.2021
In the case of China Machine New Energy Corp v Jaguar Energy Guatemala LLC and Another [2020] SGCA 12, the Singapore’s Court of Appeal clarified that a party’s right under Article 18 of the UNCITRAL Model Law
READ MORE
Date: 05.05.2021
In the case of BTP v BTN [2021] SGHC 38, the Singapore High Court confirmed that an unsuccessful application to set aside an arbitral award or
READ MORE
Date: 05.05.2021
In CJD v CJE [2021] SGHC 61, the Singapore High Court refused to join a company as a respondent to an arbitration even though that company had signed the contract containing the arbitration agreement
READ MORE
Date: 05.05.2021
In the case of Cheung Teck Cheong Richard and others v LVND Investments Pte Ltd [2021] SGHC 28, the plaintiffs purchased the shop units developed by the defendant and claimed that the defendant had made fraudulent
READ MORE
Date: 05.05.2021
In CIM v CIN [2021] SGHC 75, the Singapore High Court held that there is no duty for a party to correct an opponent's incorrect understanding of its case in an arbitration.
READ MORE
Date: 09.03.2021
The Singapore High Court (SGHC) in the case of CHH v CHI [2020] SGHC 269 dismissed an application under section 48 of the Arbitration Act
Date: 09.03.2021
In the recent case of Trinity Construction Development Pte Ltd v Sinohydro Corp Ltd (Singapore Branch) [2020] SGHC 215, the Singapore High Court (SGHC)
Date: 09.03.2021
Recently, the Singapore Court of Appeal in CBS v CBP [2021] SGCA 4 held that an arbitrator's denial of witness evidence at a hearing constituted to a breach of natural justice.
Date: 25.01.2021
After the EU and China concluded in principle agreement regarding the CAI in December 2020, last Friday (22. January 2021) the text of the CAI has been published for the first time.
Date: 12.01.2021
It is trite that parties to an arbitration in Singapore are obligated to keep the documents and proceedings confidential. However, a question arose whether this general obligation of confidentiality applies to all arbitrations, specifically, in an investment treaty arbitration.
READ MORE
Date: 12.01.2021
In a recent decision of CGS v CGT [2020] SGHC 183 the Singapore High Court refused to set aside a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”)
Date: 12.01.2021
The recent case of Silverlink Resorts v MS First Capital Insurance Ltd [2020] SGHC 151 illustrates that a failure to carefully consider the jurisdiction and arbitration clauses in an insurance policy can lead to further dispute and incur further legal costs.
Date: 12.01.2021
In the recent case of Gokul Patnaik v Nine Rivers Capital Limited [2020] SGHC(I) 23 the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) dismissed the Plaintiff’s application to set aside an SIAC arbitration award (“Award”)
Date: 12.01.2021
In the case of BRS v BRQ & ano’r [2020] SGCA 108 the Singapore Court of Appeal has repealed an arbitral award and remitted the matter to the Tribunal
Date: 12.01.2021
The Singapore High Court in the case of Himalaya Food International Ltd v Simplot India LLC [2020] SGHC 222 dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award which was alleged to have exceeded the scope of submission to arbitration.
Date: 12.01.2021
In the case of BTN and another v BTP and another [2020] SGCA 105 the respondents, BTP and BTQ (both are individuals) sold their shares of the company and BTN (a Mauritian company) assumed 100% control of the Malaysian company
Date: 12.01.2021
The case of Trinity Construction Development Pte Ltd v Sinohydro Corp Ltd (Singapore Branch) [2020] SGHC 215 emphasises the pro-arbitration attitude of the Singapore courts which are ready to grant a stay of arbitration to an applicant which had consistently disputed the jurisdiction of the arbitral Tribunal.
Date: 26.10.2020
In CBX & Anor v CBZ and Anors [2020] SGHC(1) 17, the SGP High Court dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award even though the Tribunal erred in applying the relevant substantive law.
Date: 26.10.2020
In December 2019, in BNA v BNB and another [2019] SGCA 84 the Singapore Court of Appeal (“SGCA“) discussed the interpretation of an arbitration agreement that provided for disputes to be submitted to the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) [R1]Please hyperlink the judgment highlighted below to the text here printed in bold
READ MORE
Date: 26.10.2020
In Bloomberry Resorts and Hotels v Global Gaming Philippines [2020] SGHC 01, the Singapore High Court held that timelines must be adhered to in an application to set aside an award
Date: 26.10.2020
In the case of BXS v BXT [2019] SGHC(I)10, the plaintiff applied to set aside a Singapore International Arbitration Centre award seated in Singapore. However, the application was brought outside the three-months time limit for challenging an arbitral award under Article 34(3) Model Law.
Date: 26.10.2020
In Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v Avant Garde Maritime Services [2019] SGCA 33, the Court of Appeal repealed the decision of the High Court, which ruled that non-participation in an arbitration will preclude a subsequent challenge
Date: 26.10.2020
The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) had announced this month that the ICC Executive Board approved the revised ICC Rules of Arbitration
Date: 26.10.2020
The London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”) amended the LCIA Arbitration Rules which took effect on 1 October 2020.
Date: 26.10.2020
To strengthen Singapore’s reputation as an international commercial arbitration hub, the Ministry of Law has proposed the International Arbitration (Amendment) Bill: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Bills-Supp/29-2020/Published/20200901?DocDate=20200901
Date: 26.10.2020
The United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (“the Singapore Convention”) entered into force on 12th September 2020.
Presently, a settlement agreement made in one country has no legal force in another. With the Convention in force, businesses seeking enforcement of a mediated settlement agreement across borders can do so by applying directly to the courts of countries that have signed and ratified the treaty. Therefore, businesses can rely on mediation as a dispute resolution option for their cross-border transactions, with greater certainty and assurance that their mediated outcomes are enforceable.
Date: 26.10.2020
On 13 October 2020, Bolivia became the seventh State Party to the United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor State Arbitration (“the Mauritius Convention on Transparency")
Date: 26.10.2020
On Mediated Settlement Agreements On 22 July 2020, the Republic of Ghana signed the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (the “Singapore Convention”) since it opened for signature in Singapore on 7 August 2019. The Singapore Convention provides a harmonised and simplified framework to facilitate international trade and commerce by enabling disputing parties to enforce and invoke settlement agreements resulting from mediation across borders.
Date: 26.10.2020
On 24 August 2020, Ethiopia became the 165th State Party to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the "New York Convention”) which will enter into force for Ethiopia on 22 November 2020. The New York Convention requires courts of contracting states to give effect to private agreements to arbitrate and to recognize and enforce arbitration awards made in other contracting states, subject to limited exceptions.
Date: 05.08.2020
To analyze this question we have published an article on the Kluwer Arbitration Blog
Date: 05.08.2020
Is the law of the arbitration agreement the law of the seat or the law of the underlying contract? Already in 2010 English and French courts have reached fundamentally different decisions to answer this question
Date: 05.08.2020
In the case of China Machine New Energy Corporation v Jaguar Energy Guatemala LLC and another [2020] SGCA 12, the Singapore Court of Appeal enunciated that a balance must be struck between genuine due process concerns and the arbitral Tribunal’s legitimate duty to ensure a prompt and efficient resolution of the dispute at hand.
Date: 05.08.2020
In PUBG Corp v Garena International I Pte Ltd and others [2020] SGCA 51, the Singapore Court of Appeal deliberated that a stay of the parties’ ongoing Court proceedings should be granted on “case management” grounds, in favour of arbitration proceedings stemming from a settlement agreement that was entered into between the parties in the midst of the Court Proceedings.
Date: 05.08.2020
In Carlsberg Breweries A/S c CSAPL (Singapore) Holdings Pte Ltd [2020] SGHC(I) 5 the Plaintiff sued for the repayment of a loan extended to the Defendant under a loan agreement. The repayment was triggered by the Defendant’s breach of Clauses 2(a) and 2(c) of their Deed of Undertaking, some of which were constituted by breaches of the Amended Shareholders’ Agreement. The issues arose from an Amended Shareholders' Agreement and were, by common consent, to be determined in the conjoined references to arbitration.
Date: 05.08.2020
In BYL and Anor v BYN [2020] SGHC(I) 6 the Plaintiffs sought to set aside a Partial Award obtained through an ICC Arbitration by citing two grounds:
Date: 05.08.2020
It is trite that the notion of Calderbank offers denotes that a Court has the discretion to make an adverse costs order against a party if he refuses an offer to settle proceedings for a particular sum which is more than the sum granted in the final judgment. The application of Calderbank offers remains the same in an arbitration governed by Singapore law.
Date: 05.08.2020
Saudi Arabia’s ratification was effected on 5 May 2020 and the Convention will enter into force for Saudi Arabia on 5 November 2020. Saudi Arabia became the fourth State Party to the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements.
Date: 26.05.2020
The outbreak of the COVID-19 virus had a severe impact on all industries worldwide, the international arbitration scene certainly being no exception. The pandemic has achieved what 89 % participants of the 2018 Queen Mary (“The Evolution of international Arbitration”)
READ MORE
Date: 26.05.2020
Since its inception, arbitration has been known as a flexible and adaptable mechanism which can assist participants in solving their disputes and achieving practical solutions.
Major arbitral institutions have responded swiftly and proactively to adapt to the demands of remote working and virtual hearings since the outbreak of the virus. Some examples:
READ MORE
Date: 26.05.2020
Under the GDPR, any host of a video conference (i.e. the organiser of the video conference) is highly likely to be considered as a “data controller”. This means that the organiser of the conference (i.e. the Tribunal) will have to consider how the data should be processed so that no data protection laws will be breached. On the other hand, the video conferencing provider/platform will be considered as “data processor” under the GDPR. This menas that the video conferencing providers must also take into account and adhere to the parameters of GDPR if any of the participants are domiciled in the European Union (“EU”) or when the provider is established in the EU.
Date: 26.05.2020
It is settled law that a party to a contract can apply for a stay of court proceedings when there is an agreement to arbitrate. However, it remained unclear if such a stay could be applied by a third party. Recently in January, the Singapore High Court (“the Court”) had the chance to clear the ambiguity in the case of Hai Jiang 1401 Pte Ltd v Singapore Technologies Marine Ltd [2020] SGHC 20 (https://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/os-83-2018-hai-jiang-final-24012020-pdf.pdf). This marks the first time that a local court has ratified the principle that a non-party to a contract which contains an exclusive jurisdiction clause (or arbitration clauses) can obtain an anti-suit injunction against a person that had commenced proceedings abroad against him.
Date: 26.05.2020
It is settled law that a debtor company needs to raise triable issues or establish a bona fide dispute in order to obtain a stay or dismissal of the winding-up application. The exception to this rule is evinced in the English case of Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd v Altomart Ltd (No 2) [2015] Ch 589. The court therein held that, if the dispute with regards to the debt is subject to an arbitration agreement, the prima facie standard of review ought to apply. Nevertheless, there have been conflicting approaches in the common law jurisdictions when deciding the applicable standard of review in such cases.
READ MORE
Date: 26.05.2020
In the case of BXH v BXI [2020] SGCA 28, (https://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/-2020-sgca-28-pdf.pdf) the Singapore Court of Appeal allowed an appeal to set aside a substantial part of an arbitral award under Article 34(2)(a)(i) of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (“Model Law”). In coming to its decision, the Court of Appeal considered a number of novel issues arising from the assignment, novation and reassignment of the legal right to arbitrate over to certain debts.
READ MORE
Date: 21-11-2019
Amendments to the AA and IAA – that came into effect on 21.11.2019) now clarify that IP disputes are capable of being settled by arbitration in SGP and that an award concerning IP rights shall not be contrary to public policy. Such disputes were also arbitrable before the legislative changes and just clarify the current position.
Date: 21-11-2019
Queen Mary University of London / Pinsent Mason published a survey on International Construction Disputes (https://www.pinsentmasons.com/thinking/special-reports/international-arbitration-survey). The key findings are that while arbitration is still regarded by construction companies as the preferred method for resolving disputes on international construction projects, there is scope for improved efficiency and flexibility at all stages of the arbitral process.
Date: 18-11-2019
In "ST Group Co Ltd and others v Sanum Investments Limited and another appeal" [2019] SGCA 65 the Singapore Court of Appeals recently ruled that once an arbitration is incorrectly seated (i.e. in a seat not chosen by the parties), in the absence of a waiver by the parties, any subsequent award would not be recognised and enforced by the courts (https://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/ca-113-2018-j---sanum-pdf.pdf).
Date: 27-10-2019
The process of allowing experts or other witnesses to make their statements together can be difficult to handle. Recent developments in this area are therefore very welcome, especially since there are hardly any regulations for this procedure so far.
Date: 03-10-2019
In the judgement (“BXS v BXT [2019] SGHC(I) 10”) the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) decided whether it has the power to extend the period within which an action may be brought against an award.
Date: 02-10-2019
Article 16 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (“Model Law”) provides a means for the early settlement of disputes concerning the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal.
Date: 02-10-2019
The “Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation” (“the Singapore Convention or the Convention ”) was signed on August 7, 2019 in Singapore by 46 states including the US, China, India, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka, Brunei and Singapore.
SINGAPORE Office
1 North Bridge Road #16-03 High Street Centre
Singapore 179094
Cell +65 9751 0757
Tel +65 6324 0060
Fax +65 6324 0223