Header graphic for print
ARBlog International Arbitration News, Trends and Cases

Tag Archives: SIAC

PRC Court refuses to enforce SIAC arbitral award made by one arbitrator under expedited arbitration procedures when arbitration agreement provided for three arbitrators

In Noble Resources International Pte. Ltd v. Shanghai Good Credit International Trade Co., Ltd. (2016) Hu 01 Xie Wai Ren No. 1, the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court in a judgment dated 11 August 2017 refused recognition and enforcement of a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC“) arbitral award under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (“New York Convention“) on the basis that the composition of the arbitral tribunal and/or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties.

SIAC Announces Release of the SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules

Further to our previous post the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC“) announced on 30 December 2016 the official release of the first edition of its Investment Arbitration Rules (“SIAC IA Rules 2017“), a specialised set of rules to address the unique issues present in the conduct of international investment arbitration. The SIAC IA Rules 2017 came into effect on 1 January 2017. A copy of the rules can be found here. Mr Gary Born, President of the SIAC Court of Arbitration, commented that the rules “contain significant modifications to the

SIAC signs an MOA with GIFTCL and further strengthens its Indian presence

On 3 June 2016, SIAC announced that it entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA“) with the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City Company Limited (“GIFTCL“) and GIFT SEZ Limited (“GIFT SEZ“). Under the MOA, SIAC will establish a representative office in the IFSC-GIFT, and SIAC, GIFTCL and GIFT SEZ will promote the use of arbitration, mediation and other dispute resolution mechanisms to resolve international commercial disputes in India’s International Financial Services Centre in Gujarat international Finance Tec-City (IFSC-GIFT). The Indian economy has seen an increasing number of commercial disputes in recent

SIAC announces newest edition of Arbitration Rules

On 27 May 2016, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC“) introduced the sixth edition of its Arbitration Rules (SIAC Rules 2016). Mr Gary Born, President of the SIAC Court of Arbitration, commented that the new rules “…contain many innovative features aimed at ensuring that SIAC stays at the cutting edge of international arbitration practice around the world.” The SIAC Rules 2016 come into effect on 1 June 2016. WHAT ARE THE CHANGES? Multiple Contracts and Consolidation (Rule 6 and Rule 8) – A streamlined process for disputes arising out of

Record year for SIAC

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) has released its Annual Report for 2015, revealing the highest number of new cases and the highest total amount in dispute in its history. An overview of the statistics in the Annual Report shows that: SIAC administered 271 new cases from 55 jurisdictions; representing a 300% rise from a decade ago and a 22% increase from 2014; SIAC handled a total amount in dispute of $6.23 billion, an increase of 25% from 2014; Singaporean parties continued to be the largest contributor to the SIAC

SIAC Announces Public Consultation on Draft Investment Arbitration Rules

On 1 February 2016, SIAC commenced a public consultation process on its draft Investment Arbitration Rules 2016.  A copy of the draft rules can be found here. The draft Investment Arbitration Rules include many new provisions which have been the focus of discussion within the international arbitration community, including provisions on early dismissal of claims, confidentiality, submissions by non-disputing parties and disclosure of third party funding arrangements. In a press release announcing the consultation, Gary Born, the President of the SIAC Court of Arbitration, said that: “As investment arbitration continues

Who gets the first bite? Singapore High Court gives primacy to the tribunal where existence of an arbitration agreement is in dispute

In Malini Ventura v Knight Capital Pte Ltd [2015] SGHC 225, the Singapore High Court dismissed an application for an interim injunction staying SIAC arbitration proceedings.  The application had been made on the basis that the plaintiff’s signature in an arbitration agreement was forged and, as a consequence, that the arbitration agreement did not exist. The High Court held that an arbitral tribunal has the first bite at deciding whether or not there is an arbitration agreement and that, under Singapore law, a party needs only show on a prima

Astro v First Media – lessons learned

The latest development in the dispute over a failed joint venture between Astro, a Malaysian media group (“Astro“), and companies which are part of the Indonesian giant Lippo, including PT First Media TBK (“First Media“) (Astro Nusantara International B.V. and others v PT First Media TBK and others, HCCT 45/2010), saw the Hong Kong High Court allowing enforcement of arbitral awards made in favour of Astro, despite the Singapore Court of Appeal’s (“Singapore CA“) ruling in October 2013 refusing enforcement. Case Summary The arbitration proceedings commenced at SIAC in 2008,

New Singapore International Mediation Centre and SIAC to offer “arbitration/mediation/arbitration” procedure

The Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC), was launched on 5 November 2014.  The SIMC and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) will jointly offer an innovative new “arbitration/mediation/arbitration” procedure (the SIAC-SIMC Arb/Med/Arb Protocol). Under the SIAC-SIMC Arb/Med/Arb Protocol, disputes are referred to arbitration at the SIAC, but after the respondent files its Response to the Notice of Arbitration, the arbitration will be stayed for a period of eight weeks and referred to mediation with a separate mediator appointed from the SIMC’s panel.  Should the mediation result in a settlement, the

New JCAA Rules – comparison of key Asian Arbitral Institutions

Introduction As we reported recently, the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association (JCAA) published new Commercial Arbitration Rules earlier this year.  The new JCAA Rules apply to all arbitrations commenced on or after 1 February 2014. We recently published a note comparing the new JCAA Rules to the latest rules of three other major institutions popular with parties in Asia: SIAC (the Singapore International Arbitration Centre), HKIAC (the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre), and the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce). The new JCAA Rules include a number of provisions intended to bring

Another stellar year for SIAC

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) has published its Annual Report for 2013, reporting strong caseload statistics for the year. The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) has again reported strong case statistics, with another record setting year in 2013, confirming Singapore’s popularity as an international arbitration centre. SIAC’s latest results surpass those achieved in 2012 by all key measures: SIAC saw a 10% increase in new cases filed from 235 (in 2012) to 259 (in 2013). The value of those new cases amounted to a record S$6.06 billion (nearly double

Emergency arbitrators: a passing trend?

A feature of the wave of revisions to the rules of various arbitral institutions over recent years has been the rise of the emergency arbitrator.  The International Centre for Dispute Resolution (“ICDR”) and Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) were early trend-setters, introducing emergency arbitrator procedures that came into force in 2006 and 2010 respectively.  The emergency arbitrator has since become widespread in international arbitration rules: institutions including the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (“HKIAC”), Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”), Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (“KLRCA”), the Swiss Chambers of

New Seoul International Dispute Resolution Centre

As part of South Korea’s ongoing efforts to establish itself as an international arbitration destination to rival Hong Kong and Singapore, the new Seoul International Dispute Resolution Centre opened at the end of May. The new centre, which has four hearing rooms and three preparation rooms, is fashioned after Singapore’s Maxwell Chambers, and will host arbitrations held under the rules of major arbitral institutions – including the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the London Court of International Arbitration, the ICC, the International Centre for Dispute