publication banner

Setting aside awards: Singapore High Court clarifies approach to setting aside of awards (status of interim measures in arbitration; apparent bias etc.)

The Singapore High Court case DLS v DLT [2025] SGHC 61, arose from a construction dispute between a Contractor and a Sub-Contractor, with the arbitration seated in Singapore under ICC Rules. In this case, the Singapore High Court provided crucial guidance on the following issues:

  1. The distinction between interim measures and partial awards — and why that distinction matters
    When determining whether a tribunal's decisions are "awards" (Sec. 2 IAA), or interim orders (Sec. 12 IAA), Courts will consider substance over form. I.e. is the decision provisional or final? Specifically, does it "definitively or finally dispose of a claim or issue" and is it "inherently capable of being varied"?

  2. Whether new grounds for setting aside an award can be introduced outside the three-month statutory deadline
    The Court confirmed that while a party must file a setting aside application within the three-month period prescribed under Art. 34(3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law, it may, subject to the Court's discretion, file a supplementary affidavit introducing new grounds (e.g., apparent bias), provided the initial application was filed in time.

  3. How courts assess apparent bias based on an arbitrator’s failure to disclose potential conflicts
    The Court reaffirmed the Singapore test for disqualification: whether there are circumstances that would give rise to a reasonable apprehension in a fair-minded observer with knowledge of the facts that the tribunal may be biased and that a fair hearing may not be possible.

Contact me now


Contact

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