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

Tag Archives: Singapore International Arbitration Act

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

Singapore High Court rules on the application of the PRC-Laos bilateral investment treaty to Macau

In Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (“Laos”) v Sanum Investments Ltd (“Sanum”) [2015] SGHC 15, the Singapore High Court allowed an appeal under section 10 of the Singapore International Arbitration Act (the “IAA”) to an UNCITRAL arbitral tribunal’s ruling on jurisdiction, finding that the bilateral investment treaty between the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) and the Laos (the “BIT”) did not extend to the Macau Special Administrative Region of China (“Macau”). Sanum, a Macau-based entity, had invested in Laos’ gaming and hospitality industry through a joint venture with

Singapore High Court considers arbitrability of intra-corporate claims

Abstract: In Silica Investors Ltd v Tomolugen Holdings Ltd [2014] SGHC 101], the Singapore High Court considered the principles of arbitrability in the context of a minority oppression claim. Speedread: The Singapore High Court has held that a minority oppression claim brought by a shareholder against the company and other shareholders was not arbitrable, as the relief would affect third parties to the arbitration agreement. In the court’s view, such claims would not be arbitrable unless all parties that could be affected were parties to the arbitration agreement. (Silica Investors

The Singapore High Court considers its power to grant permanent injunctive relief in support of international arbitration proceedings

In R1 International Pte ltd v Lonstroff AG the Singapore High Court dismissed an application for a permanent anti suit injunction in support of arbitration proceedings, finding that there was no arbitration agreement.  Nevertheless the court considered, obiter, its powers to grant permanent relief. R1 International, a Singapore company, applied to make permanent an interim anti-suit injunction restraining Lonstroff AG (the respondent), a Swiss company, from pursuing proceedings in a Swiss court on the basis of a disputed sale of rubber. The court dismissed the application and discharged the interim

Singapore High Court rejects a challenge to the enforcement of an arbitration award founded on fraud and corruption

The Singapore High Court has confirmed the principle an allegation of fraud in a civil matter will be considered on the balance of probabilities, but that the nature of the evidence to enable a finding to be made should be more persuasive or strong than that required for a finding of, for example, negligence. In Beijing Sinozonto Mining Investment Co Ltd v Goldenray Consortium (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2014] 1 SLR 814, the Singapore High Court considered a challenge under s31(4)(b) of the Singapore International Arbitration Act to the enforcement of

Astro v Lippo: Singapore Court of Appeal clarifies award debtor’s right to challenge arbitral tribunal’s decision on jurisdiction and joinder of third parties

The Singapore Court of Appeal has given its much-anticipated decision in the latest chapter of the long running Astro v Lippo dispute, allowing an appeal by PT First Media TBK (a Lippo company) against enforcement orders issued by the Singapore High Court in respect of arbitral awards worth US$250 million made in favour of eight companies belonging to the Astro group.  (PT First Media TBK (formerly known as PT Broadband Multimedia TBK) v Astro Nusantara International BV and others and another appeal [2013] SGCA 57.) The arbitration proceedings related to

Breach of natural justice and the limited rights of appeal under the Singapore International Arbitration Act

Two recent decisions the Singapore High Court confirm the principle of minimal curial intervention in arbitral awards and highlight the limited rights of appeal to the Singapore courts for parties who elect to arbitrate. There is no provision under the Singapore International Arbitration Act (“IAA”) or the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law for the courts to set aside arbitral awards in cases of errors of law or fact on the part of the arbitral tribunal.  Applications to the Singapore courts for an arbitral award to be set aside can only be