Click the maroon box above for a formatted PDF of the article
under the contract and they were granted five extensions resulting in the completion date of opportunity to be heard on all relevant matters relating thereto. this was an issue involving a former employee of the defendant, the west the defendant and there was a pre-existing substantive cause of action subject to singapore arbitration agreements to provide as such. on the other hand, this position may contradict brunei darussalam (aabd) and the siac.6 surpassed the boundaries of legitimate expectation and propriety, culminating in actual prejudice to a party, finding that he was a party to the arbitration, the court could not refuse enforcement unless to the agreement, have gone to the arizona courts to determine the question of whether court that considered the scope of the public policy exception. take part in the proceedings and an award was eventually made in favour of aloe vera. with the philippine supreme court to enjoin enforcement of the agreements, which it did in the parties being given notice (at the preliminary conference stage) and was a premature with important issues in arbitration law arose for consideration in the high court and court of mareva interlocutory relief, see paras 92 to 93. in the front carriers case there was a substantive claim concluded by stating that: "as a matter of both principle and policy, the courts will seek to support rather than of any dispute arising out of it, that dispute would be referred to arbitration in london. that chiew was mentioned in the arbitration agreement and that the arbitrator had made a set out in section 31(2) or section 31(4) of the iaa. his application was dismissed by the 344 singapore year book of international law (2007) 11 sybil international commercial arbitration 343 guided by the judicial philosophy of minimal interference in the arbitrator's conduct in of natural justice to succeed, the applicant must establish which rule of natural justice was implicated, how it court the power to grant a `free-standing' mareva injunction even in cases where the plaintiff has no substantive court proceedings, but it stated that that provision does not confer power upon the court to that section 31(4)(a) applied. finally, he failed to show that enforcement would offend parliamentary intent, or the lack thereof) of the iaa which was primarily concerned with the defendant, a panamanian company, had entered into a power for it to grant orders and reliefs set out under section 12(1) of the act. to resolving `.sg' domain name disputes although litigation in the courts remains an option for the dispute to be resolved. held abroad. she explained that section 12(1) of the iaa spells out in detail the interim under the act encompassed a narrow scope". sentences are in different order from the paragraphs they are . 11 sybil international commercial arbitration 341 tribunals. thus, for instance, it is accepted that even if an arbitrator made an error of law, a court should not was not ordinarily subject to singapore law. and decision on this issue and refused to set aside the award on this ground.25 severability principle to the arbitration clause before determining the law applicable to the and to adduce such the evidence necessary for it to deal with them. in other words, he arbitration that was instituted based upon an international arbitration agreement that did it is no longer possible to apply for summary judgment before a defence is filed. therefore, respect of singapore assets of a foreign defendant if the only purpose of such relief is to support foreign court proceedings in london. the injunction was set aside by the judge of first instance but the 20 citing the cases of karaha bodas co llc v. pertamina energy trading ltd, [2006] 1 sing.l.r. 112 and siskina were not a basis to do so and that it would not reconsider the merits of the decision, which effect. hence, the court took the view that section 12(7) does not provide an independent source of statutory in the swift-fortune case,11 these are powers that justify the extra-ordinary effects of extra-territorial application with was required to deposit a sum of money with a bank in singapore to he held under the international commercial arbitration including challenges based on the allegation of breach of natural justice.32 of both agreements. 46 see note 45 at para 17. 10 loh chee kong "singapore could become asia's sports umpire: republic among the favourites to singapore's basic notions of justice and morality so as to satisfy the public policy exception. highest sports tribunal, to establish a presence in singapore to cater to the asia-pacific a plaintiff cannot apply for a summary judgment while a stay application is pending simply determination by the tribunal. conversely, piat contended that the severing was proper 18 section 12(1) of the iaa lists the powers of an arbitral tribunal including the power to make interim injunctions. hence it was within the scope of the matters submitted for arbitration and the government international commercial arbitration" (2006)10 sybil 363, 367-369. under order 29 rule 10 of the rules of court.44 26 see note 1. pleadings. these are its "points of reference" and the arbitrator is not be entitled to go for collection and not when they have notice of the actual contents of the award (hong (aa), the high court set aside the arbitral award due to a breach of natural justice. in was a part of, were null and void as determined by its courts, then it could not be severed measures of protection which an arbitral tribunal may make, which are remedies aimed at thereafter the arbitrator the arbitrator also held that chiew was the alter ego of asianic food. chiew refused to the swift-fortune case and held that the court had the power under the iaa to assist, proceedings, the right of appeal is severely restricted. thus, if the rule is necessary and contract incorporating the standard form of the singapore institute of architects' articles market.10 hear an order 14 application and a stay application together. in such cases, the court could is strong endorsement of arbitration indeed. it is ironic though, that to finally decide that 19 and section 18(1) of the supreme court of judicature act (scja). and hence did not prejudice the respondent necessitating the setting aside of the award.33 took the position that the correspondence between its representatives and the defendant's section 12(7) of the iaa provides that in relation to these powers the high court has the same powers in mount development, employed the defendant soh bee tee (sbt) as their main contractor it may have an impact on tactical or strategic considerations for parties negotiating future arbitration agreements seeking to respect and preserve party autonomy and to ensure procedural fairness. fairness includes the right sea, [2000] 3 sing.l.r. 220 where the judge there noted that if the two contractual documents had to be read law governed both the agreement and the proceedings.36 several important decisions on arbitration law were made in 2006-7 that adds to the corpus 8 e,g,, see malar velaigam "cc pushes arbitration business in asia" the lawyer (7 june 2007) online: the 25 see note 24 at paras. 59-60. 40 [2000] 2 sing.l.r. 609, [2000] sghc 14. the project being pushed forward and a delay certificate issued against it. fairmount devel- ltd26 this is an almost to make such a determination and that such a finding was prejudicial as it amounted to a or other relevant procedures. all disputes, controversies or claims arising in connection with this agreement 13 in the same way that order 69a rules 3(1)(c) and 4(1) of the rules of court give effect procedurally to article 9. the tribunal also applied the (i.e. the enforcement process would be a `mechanistic' one). once aloe vera had proven and recognize party autonomy in their selection of arbitrators. see also, ibid. at para 98, where the court where an express ruling has been made by the arbitrator on the existence of an arbitration disputes were to be arbitrated in arizona. following termination of the agreement, aloe determined without court intervention and in the speediest manner. another contractor. sbt commenced arbitration on the basis that fairmount development in lian teck construction pte ltd v. woh hup (pte) ltd and others42 can say is that to attract curial intervention it must be established that the breach of the rules of natural justice 4 on the interpretation and scope of section 4(10) of the civil law act (cap 43 rev ed 1999). the reliefs under section 12(1) of the iaa.18 11 sybil international commercial arbitration 339 recognizable by a singapore court. tral institutes in the region, namely the malaysian institute of arbitrators (miarb), badan the need to give the parties to a dispute notice, due process and the right to be heard. the on the former, it argued that if the concession agreements, which the arbitration clause 16th international congress of maritime arbitrators from 26 february 2007 to 1 march 36 the arbitration clause stated that: "all disputes, controversies or claims arising from or relating to the con- tion but the tribunal decided otherwise and issued an award in 2004 determining, based of constitutional and statutory violations and on public policy grounds) and filed petitions in an arbitration governed by rules of procedure that provided for each party to set out its of commerce international court of arbitration (icc) in accordance with an arbitration recent developments in singapore on singapore court can grant a mareva injunction as an interim relief in aid of a foreign the plaintiff sought the award to be set aside in the high court. where the judges of by way of interim measures, international arbitration both in singapore as well as those the scope of the submission to arbitration (based on its scope of application). he also failed this case raises interesting questions about the power of an arbitrator to determine conflict on this point between two earlier high court decisions by justice prakash in the law. however, as it found that the issue did not arise on facts of the case before it, since the veil of incorporation has been lifted in arbitration proceedings, it appears that attempting opportunity to be heard and it was also decided that the finding as to timing was not soon followed, which also considered the issue but in relation to a different fact award made. held that before the amendment of order 14 rule 1 of the rules of court, the practice was to international arbitration centre (hkiac). the siac also organized california's second mareva injunctions in aid of foreign court proceedings unless there were clear and expressed words to that judgment and requires a consideration of the merits. similarly a defendant will hesitate to take a step in the 16 see note 3. where the judge gave a more generous interpretation of section 12(7) of the iaa, recognizing in the 2 [2006] 2 sing.l.r. 323, [2006] sghc 36 [swift-fortune]. injunction. challenges at the enforcement stage will be dealt with `mechanistically' this report is the third installment in a series of yearly updates that began in 2005 to track and on the power of the court to grant a mareva injunction in relation to foreign in ng chin siau and others v. how kim chuan41 irresistible conclusion if, as in this case, there are linkages between the agreements such as on 1 december 2006, in the appeal on the former case, the singapore court of appeal beyond the pleadings and decide on points on which the parties had not given evidence and 32 see note 30 at paras 59-72. first, to support arbitration as an alternative to litigation, and second, to respect section of the california state bar and the international centre for dispute resolution, under the sdrp. thus far, 10 panel decisions have been submitted and concluded under the and conditions of building contract (measurement contract (5th edition). in the course 41 [2007] 2 sing.l.r. 789, [2007] sghc 31. opment subsequently terminated the contract with sbt due to its delays and appointed 44 this is because the considerations for an application for interim payment are the same as one for summary 338 singapore year book of international law (2007) the court determined that the respondent, fairmount development, did have every 2003. piat thereby commenced arbitration proceedings with the international chamber it was later discovered that the former employee had no authority to fix the charter. the 11 sybil international commercial arbitration 345 that party and another before the court enforcing an international arbitration award. where justice v.k. rajah served as keynote speaker. basis of the severability issue and the argument that singapore was chosen as a neutral place it was noted that a separate appeal against the front carriers appeal in 2006-7. there was the case of aloe vera of america, inc v. asianic food (s) pte ltd1 than substantial prejudice, it certainly does not embrace technical or procedural irregular- huat development co (pte) ltd v. hiap hong & co pte ltd).40 one agreement varying the other and that many potential disputes can implicate the terms infinite range of factual permutations or imponderables that may confront the courts in the future. what we 31(4)(b) of the iaa narrow. there was also the interesting and ostensibly conflicting high see note 30 at paras 42-58. 43 see note 42 at paras 9-10. case, piat constructed the terminal in accordance with the agreements but the government of construction, sbt made several applications for extension of time on various grounds that a remedy can or should be made available". resist enforcement under section 31(2)(b). he did not adduce expert evidence to show that fairmount development pte ltd v. soh beng tee & co pte ltd,29 the trust placed in the arbitration regime. the policy favouring arbitration appear even to award under section 31(4)(b) of the iaa the injunction. important in litigation, it is even more important to maintain the integrity of the arbitration 28 i.e. not delving into the merits of the case, thereby placing a degree of trust on properly instituted arbitral 47 he cited in agreement the decision of tay yong kwang j in mancon (bvi) investment holding v. heng holdings running of the business. the agreement was to be governed by the law of arizona, usa and d. other cases of interest decision has been filed, and perhaps in the next issue this question would be categorically on the local laws and policy), where the remedies overlap, the party must make a tactical clarified the scope of section 12(7) of the iaa in relation to the question of whether a arbitrate the matter. see note 42 at paras 13, 16 and 19. this case illustrates that, especially in international arbitration proceedings and relating once again, an unsuccessful party to an arbitration attempted to set aside the leave that city hall on 4 may 2007 with the swiss arbitration association (asa) and the hong kong be singapore and the language of the arbitration shall be english". subsequent case of front carriers ltd v. atlantic & orient shipping corp decided by justice ii. the cases the court of appeals and another case was also heard before justice prakash in the high effect and the extent of the court's power to grant a mareva injunction in aid of conference from 12 to 13 july 2007 pursuant to a memoranda of co-operation with arbi- give judgment for a sum indisputably due under summary judgement while simultaneously resolution service secretariat, which manages the dispute resolution mechanism under the agreements ("in substance a composite agreement"46 the event. basis that the tribunal was found to have decided on the issue relating to timing without in the development of a condominium housing project and they entered into a building jurisdiction. due to the territorial effect of its legislation, the legislature had no power to with international law firms keen to expand their arbitration practice and business in of time of arbitration rather than leave it to the enforcement stage to raise an issue as to the which the court noted was the source of its power to grant interim injunctions in such agreements have to be read consistent with one another in respect of the dispute under the amended order 14 rule 1, annual programme on key issues in international arbitration with the international law power to grant a mareva injunction under section 4(10) of the cla in aid of foreign arbi- to be heard and mandates equality of treatment. arid, hollow, technical or procedural objections that do not and strategic decision, based on its understanding of the arbitration laws of the jurisdictions to the singapore high court for relief including a mareva injunction restraining the defen- on the kompetenz-kompetenz principle, that it did have jurisdiction and that singapore trump `technical' adherence to the fundamental principle of natural justice such that "actual that an arbitrator can be said to have any jurisdiction or power to resolve a dispute between air terminals co, inc,35 lawyer . process. seat of arbitration. interim measures are not contrary to the intentions of the parties to an law. the high court agreed with piat and stated that the arbitration clause could be law (new york); solicitor (england & wales). the author is an assistant professor of law at the singapore party to the agreement, basing their decision on the wide wording of the arbitration clause. t]he reason was that the act gave primacy to the autonomy of arbitral proceedings and allowed court intervention from the agreements. it also sought to argue that the principle was dealt with without 35 [2007] 1 sing.l.r. 278, [2006] sghc 206. manager website at: http://www.disputemanager.com.sg/sdrp/proceedings_info.htm. the sdrp, the sdrp indies company, negotiated with the plaintiff, a liberian company, the charter of a vessel. 42 [2006] 4 sing.l.r. 1, [2006] sghc 118. where there were two closely related and reasonable grounds for the actions of the tribunal that will detract from an allegation singapore domain name dispute resolution policy (sdrp). the sdrp provides a frame- it was decided that that even if there had been a breach of the rules of natural jus- chiew, when he was faced with a preliminary ruling by the arbitrator that he was a party international arbitral tribunal in the absence of strong evidence of manifest breach of the tion for late delivery. on the day before the final delivery, the plaintiff successfully applied the lesson here for a person or entity alleged to have been a party to an arbitration thus the appeal was dismissed. will be considered. where the court stated that "[e]rrors of law or fact, per se, did not engage the public policy of singapore...[and rules of natural justice. in this case, the philippine government applied for the setting aside follow the developments in arbitration law in singapore. several prominent cases that dealt 12(7) of the act gives effect to article 9 of the uncitral model law on international ) involving the same parties and con- work for resolving domain name disputes over the use of the `.sg' country coded top level aside the order on the same basis as before and alternatively on the public policy grounds not purport to apply extra-territorially. judge andrew 12(7) of the iaa does not apply to foreign arbitrations, but it applies to an international which was signed on the latter's behalf by steven chiew, its manager who was active in the upheld the earlier decision. the court agreed that the public policy exception under the iaa agreement itself, which it determined to be singapore law under an implied choice. the claim against the defendant in the court proceedings, thereby effectively aiding foreign arbitrations. is sought to be enforced may provide different solutions for an objecting party (depending proceedings. commerce by three (3) arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said rules. the place of arbitration shall the defendant made several extensions on the date of delivery of the vessel which were a `legal necessity' to consider severability and to sever the arbitration clause from the rest of in the pt asuransi jasa indonesia (persero) v. dexia bank sa,24 defendant in london for the breach of the time charter. the defendant applied to set aside to reiterate, in this case, the plaintiff sought to obtain a mareva injunction against the made and published when the arbitrator gives notice to the parties that the award is ready the policy to be pro-arbitration irrespective of the venue and law and for singapore to set that severability as an issue was clearly a part of the determination on governing law. it was 33 section 48(1)(a)(vii) of the aa requires the rights of any party to have been prejudiced. it also requires that 342 singapore year book of international law (2007) because a defendant applying for a stay in favour of arbitration would not yet have filed a 6 the conference program featured a host of speakers from the participating jurisdictions speaking on current top- 30 soh beng tee & co pte ltd v. fairmount development pte ltd, [2007] sgca 28. civil law act (cla) an example in this regard. aloe vera then brought the award to singapore and obtained leave from the domestic to extend court assistance in granting interim relief such as mareva injunctions and the that the complainant could not have presented any ground-breaking evidence and/or submissions regardless, in her decision, justice belinda ang disagreed with the ruling of her fellow judge in justice prakash set aside the award on the basis of a breach of natural justice in the course 3 [2006] 3 sing.l.r. 854, [2006] sghc 127 [front carriers]. court to enforce the award against chiew and asianic food pursuant to the new york given coercive effect with the high court's leave under section 12(6) of the act. section 2007. the singapore international arbitration centre (siac) co-hosted the asian-european clause under one of the concession agreements. make rules relating to foreign international arbitrations and subject to foreign law, which had not made submissions upon. if an arbitrator considers that the parties have not framed of section 24 of the international arbitration act (iaa). had not taken the opportunity to decide on the extension of the scope of section 4(10) of the cla to foreign i. introduction court to set aside any leave granted to the other party to enforce the award. 24 [2007] 1 sing.l.r. 597; [2006] sgca 41. 1 [2006] 3 sing.l.r. 174, [2006] sghc 78. decision to the former case.5 15 see note 2. court of first instance. to the issue, preferring restraint from refusal to enforce and the narrow interpretation of is functus officio. 340 singapore year book of international law (2007) on the plaintiff's part. it to arbitration held overseas may encourage arbitrations to be held in singapore and for grant a mareva injunction against a defendant's assets in singapore unless the plaintiff has scenario that bears consideration. aloe vera entered into an agreement with asianic food, decision, finding that there has not been a breach of natural justice. they did so clearly aside of an arbitral award amongst other grounds, its appeal has been heard and decided in 12 see note 3. it too late for a person or entity against whom an arbitration award had been made to raise not stipulate singapore as the seat of the arbitration.14 concerns to the parties and allow them to make the necessary amendments to their pleadings it did not give an answer to the question as to whether the front carriers position on delivering the grounds of decision, summarised the court's findings as follows: first, section host sports arbitration court's regional base" today paper (6 april 2007) online: todayonline which was eventually clarified and reconciled by the court of appeal in the appeal substantially the same on the material facts. of singapore law on arbitration. in the meantime, demonstrating yet another approach dant from removing or in any way disposing of or dealing with or diminishing the value in econ piling pte ltd v. ncc international ab45 agreement between parties, attempting to argue again that an arbitration agreement did not it is interesting to note the conflicting policy interests that underlie the question of whether one of the grounds in sections 31(2) or 31(4) was established. chiew did not do anything to a. whether section 12 of the international arbitration act (iaa) has extra-territorial whether a person who is not, on the face of an arbitration agreement, a party to the agree- jurisdiction and once again the court was conservative, even `mechanistic',28 7 for the list of proceedings under the singapore domain name dispute resolution policy, see the dispute arbitrations. to such awards, the singapore courts are unwilling to set aside awards if there are legitimate management university school of law. the court allowed the appeal and reversed the trial judge's to raising singapore's prominence in the international arbitration scene, singapore hosted relation to all sorts of challenges to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards prejudice any party should never be countenanced. it is only where the alleged breach of natural justice has the arbitration proceedings are concluded and he becomes functus officio. an award is government then sought to set aside the arbitral award in the singapore high court on the foreign international arbitration except in limited situations covered by sections 6(3) and arbitration agreement since they support and promote the outcome of arbitration. having joint names of the plaintiff and the defendant. the moa also provided that in the event arbitration where singapore is stipulated as the seat of arbitration.17 the basis of section 12(7)(1) of the iaa, pending the outcome of the actual arbitration in only the prescribed situations. the general consensus of judicial and expert opinion was that public policy or real prejudice" must also be proven by a complainant seeking to set aside an award. this the plantiff in swift-fortune had no justiciable right against the defendant in singapore, defence to the plaintiff's claim to avoid prejudicing his stay application by taking a "step in memorandum of agreement (moa) with the plaintiff, a liberian company, to sell it a ves- ang considered the issues of stay and summary judgment in relation to arbitration. it was fair hearing would almost invariably be insufficient to set aside the award". see also note 30 at para 94. the arbitrator's finding was wrong under arizona law, or show that the award went beyond arbitral tribunals. the distinction between assistance and interference can sometimes be a which was not the case on the facts in swift-fortune case. this case reinforces the strong policy interest in "minimal curial intervention" in the york convention) to which singapore is a party. at this point in time, chiew applied to set under section 48 of the domestic arbitration act (aa) while the other fell under the purview ground. aside of an award,27 45 [2007] sghc 17. and important role. they already jointly operate the singapore domain name dispute the courts should abide by the general policy towards the support of arbitration but not except on strong grounds, and hence to discourage revisiting a case that was meant to be meanwhile, arbitration remains the preferred choice for alternative dispute resolution, that chiew was not the alter ego of asianic food under the law of arizona. was breached, how it was connected to the making of the arbitral award and how it prejudiced the plaintiff. in cyberspace, the siac and smc are also beginning to play an increasingly relevant 7(1) of the same act. that would be the case where an action could be started within the breach complained of must occur "in connection with the making of the award" such that even if there had tral proceedings if two preconditions were met, namely, if it had personal jurisdiction over wonders what direction the arbitration would have taken if the arizona courts had declared appeal addressed what they considered to be important and intertwined issues relating to injunction against the defendant while it simultaneously commenced arbitration against the the public policy exception.. even if the arbitrator had been wrong in law to pierce the air terminals (piat) over a dispute involving the construction of a third terminal building for the project under several concession agreements in 1998. in contrast to the previous second, section 12(7) it should not interfere with the arbitral tribunal's conduct, in fact the conduct itself had respect of arbitration as to a court action. the court agreed with justice prakash here that it was unlikely that frustrate or subvert the arbitration process in order to promote the two primary objectives of the act; namely, and co-hosted several events locally relating to arbitration. the country played host to the critical to the final decision (i.e. "no causal nexus between the breach and the [a]ward") two parties, one of whom has not (at least on the face of it) agreed to arbitration. one another recognized basis for setting aside an arbitral award is breach of natural justice and parliament intended section 12(7) to apply to foreign arbitrations when it did not confer such power to grant arbitration,4 the conduct of arbitrations.31 former employee resulted in the perfection of the time charter and applied for a mareva agreement is to be proactive and seriously consider dealing with the issue even at the point domain (cctld). the sdrp was adopted by the singapore network information centre the court made the observation that front carriers had further ruled that the court had this should offer guidance to any party that may wish to apply for the setting aside of an arbitral award on this to come under some detail of scrutiny before the courts. that may be yet another reason 34 see note 30 at para 91. the court went on to state that: "it is neither desirable nor possible to predict the court decision in swift-fortune ltd v. magnifica marine sa2 346 singapore year book of international law (2007) awards by keeping the interpretation of the public policy exception to enforcement under section arbitration agreement. however, the arbitrator made a preliminary ruling that chiew was a be finally settled by arbitration in the republic of the philippines following the philippine arbitration law had full opportunity to consider and address it in its submissions, so there was no breach (sgnic) private limited, the registration authority for the `.sg' domain names, and the alter- belinda ang3 it understood this to be the case. the court also found a lack of evidence of the tribunal's and parties interested in the dispute resolution industry in the region. this, the high court refused to strike down the award on the basis that errors of law or fact resolution regime. this is the practical commercial position to take.47 b. the scope of the public policy ground to refuse the enforcement of an arbitral together, it would be illogical to have an arbitration clause contained in one not apply to the other in the absence decision of two parties to refer their disputes for resolution by arbitration, it seems doubtful ment, is actually a party to the agreement and its authority to arbitrate disputes. should "encompasses a narrow scope" and referred to the preparatory materials to the uncitral of natural justice meriting a setting aside of the award.37 of its assets in singapore up to a certain amount. the defendant sought to set aside the case in a statement of case, in the same way as parties to litigation set out their cases in their been a breach of the rules of natural justice, a causal nexus must be established between the breach and the 11 sybil international commercial arbitration 347 online: . circumstances of the case.38 had wrongfully terminated the contract and the arbitrator issued an award in its favour. unsurprisingly the philippine government attacked the arbitration as having no jurisdic- and justice belinda ang's decision in the front carriers case.16 5 swift-fortune ltd v. magnifica marine sa, [2007] 1 sing.l.r. 629, [2006] sgca 42. however, the court proceedings to avoid compromising its stance that the court has no jurisdiction and its contractual right to 9 may wong "singapore keen to set up arbitral panel for sports: lawyers" channel newsasia (5 april 2007) justice prakash took the view that judge andrew of an expressed agreement otherwise. singapore is also trying to get the court of arbitration for sport (cas), the in conflict with each other in their interpretations of section 4(1) of the cla. other than that, the cases were must, at the very least, have actually altered the final outcome of the arbitral proceedings in some meaningful and that the principle was but a part of the process for determining jurisdiction and proper unfairness".34 alleged impropriety and that the tribunal had in fact acted reasonably under the facts and 31 the court extensively examined relevant case law on the imposed on an arbitrator by the rules of natural justice. cannot make a decision on points that have not been addressed by the parties. the reason and it forms the basis upon which the defendant as interlocutory relief in aid of a foreign arbitration not held in singapore on the bare fact that the arbitrator might have inadvertently denied one or both parties some technical aspect of a the scope of section 4(10) of the cla was correct, although it did raise some prelimi- vera started arbitration proceedings in arizona which included chiew as a party. chiew v. distos compania naviera sa, [1979] ac 210, a singapore court has no power to grant mareva relief in defendants appealed to the court of appeal. acceded to buy the plaintiff without prejudice to the latter's rights to claim for compensa- business disputes conference--arbitration in switzerland at the grand plaza park hotel since the second installment where the case of pt asuransi jasa indonesia (persero) v. dexia arbitrase nasional indonesia (bani), the institute of arbitrators & mediators australia 38 see note 35 at paras. 38-41. an accrued cause of action against the defendant that is justiciable in a singapore court,20 singapore if court assistance, in this case in the form of a mareva interlocutory relief, is anticipated or required. concerned, on when and where to raise an objection and whether it makes sense to raise it absence of manifest breach of natural justice resulting in actual prejudice and reaffirms ordering a stay of the rest of the claim for arbitration.43 ang affirmed that under the law of arbitration, once the arbitrator has published his award, pleadings, the arbitrator would be bound to decide the case in accordance with the parties' singapore and in the region.8 only cases dealing with significant statements and clarification on the law of arbitration singapore, an applicant will have to persuade the court that there has been some actual the other party obtained in the high court to enforce an arbitral award made in a foreign in anwar siraj and another v. teo hee lai building construction pte ltd,39 convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards of 1958 (new there have been two cases on the subject that are of interest since one dealt with the issue subsequently claimed that the agreements were null and void ab initio (due to allegations pre-determination of its jurisdictional objections at the next part of the proceedings. on of the iaa does not provide an independent source of statutory power for the court to grant bank sa23 the appeal court's decision was handed down on 9 may 2007,30 of the award under section 24 of the iaa made in favour of the philippine international the matter having been raised by any of the parties and thus failed to give each party the the cla,19 assistant registrar and his appeal was also dismissed. plaintiffs appealed. the ca heard but dismissed the appeal. chief justice chan sek keong, 17 see paras 40 to 58, in particular 48, 51 to 55. this has the effect of encouraging arbitrations to be held in agreement and the request can be made to a court in a country which is different from the native dispute resolution mechanism offers a speedier and less costly process and method c. natural justice and the severability principle several law firms are also reportedly looking to set up 27 i.e. he could apply to the supervising court to set aside the award and he could also apply to the enforcement lenge an award under the new york convention has two opportunities to seek the setting was considered in relation to the scope of the public policy ground for setting assisting in the just and proper conduct of arbitration. orders from arbitral tribunals are the agreement before the tribunal could proceed with the substantive hearing in jurisdiction. 14 see note 5. swift-fortune ltd v. magnifica marine sa, [2007] 1 sing.l.r. 629, [2006] sgca 42. by warren b. chik in its approach only once or at both stages of the process (i.e. at the pre- and post-award stage). except as indicated above shall be finally settled under the rules of arbitration of the international chamber of given for this strict adherence to points of reference is due to the fact that in arbitration struction of the terminal and/or terminal complex or in general relating to the prosecution of the works shall way. if, on the other hand, the same result could or would ultimately have been attained, or if it can be shown third, the power is drawn from section 4(10) of part of this article, a request for interim protection is not incompatible with an arbitration nary doubts on the issue.21 concomitant supervision and enforcement of such orders. on the one hand, not extending the court of appeal encouraging and assisting international arbitration proceedings in singapore and that did of the arbitration proceedings that have prejudiced the plaintiff's rights. this was on the 21 for arguments for and against restricting or widening the interpretation of section 4(10) in relation to granting by doing so, the ca resolved the in the singapore courts in the front carriers case but not in the swift-fortune case and hence the cases were not to be heard on the issue of neutrality as the tribunal did not give notice that it was going 39 [2007] sghc 29. cerning the same subject matter, jc sundaresh menon considered it counterintuitive that the plaintiff, fair- foreign arbitration under section 12(7) of the iaa and section 4(10) of the fine one. the issues of extra-territoriality and sovereignty also figures in considering whether an arbitration panel or office to deal with sports disputes to cater to the growing sports intervene unless one of the grounds under section 31 of the iaa is satisfied. see note 24 at paras. 57 and 59, with foresight as to where assets and evidence may be situated. that an arbitrator's jurisdiction and power to determine disputes arises, ultimately, from the rules and sdrp supplementary rules are available at: http://www.disputemanager.com.sg/sdrp/what.htm. high court may order interim measures by applying its own domestic law. under the first resolved.22 issues as to the existence of the arbitration agreement or justiciability of the dispute between their cases correctly and that certain points need to be addressed then he must indicate his tice, if the complainant was not able to show that it has suffered prejudice aside from 22 it is to be noted that the court distinguished the two cases on the basis that there was a justiciable cause of action existence or justiciability of the dispute between that party and another. it would be leaving asserted that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction on the basis that he was not a party to the (2007) 11 sybil 337347 © 2007 singapore year book of international law and contributors 23 [2006] 1 sing.l.r. 197; [2005] sghc 197. see warren chik, "recent developments in singapore on severed despite the alleged nullity of the concession agreements and also in the contention the court was unwilling to set aside the arbitral award of an on the latter, the philippine government argued that there was no opportunity for it 29 [2007] 1 sing.l.r. 32, [2006] sghc 189. in the judgment, it was clearly stated that for the ground of breach ll.b. (nus); ll.m. (lond.); ll.m. (tulane); advocate & solicitor (singapore); attorney and counsellor-at- ics relating to arbitration. it was organized as an important meeting point for regional arbitration practitioners swift-fortune case15 that further reinforces the strong policy recognition and enforcement of international arbitration based on section 12 of the iaa, the high court had no power to make orders to assist a commercial arbitration (uncitral model law),13 industry.9 supporting minimal interference, which is to discourage such applications for setting aside corporate veil to implicate chiew, that was not enough ground for refusal to enforce. in the judgment on appeal, justice prakash stated that although a party seeking to chal- the singapore institute of arbitrators held the inaugural regional arbitral institutes to prove that the subject matter in dispute was incapable of settlement by arbitration, such model law and established case precedents. it agreed fully with the trial judge's observations auspices of the sdrp.7 former employee later joined a singapore company as its executive director. the plaintiff the arbitrator could make such a ruling under his terms of reference? if one bears in mind at the ninoy aquino international airport in manila. the government had engaged piat to close it when the eventual award is sought to be enforced would be in vain. similarly justice prakash granted its application and in the course of her judgment stated that, of breach of natural justice. established its jurisdiction, however, the injunction was set aside due to the lack of merits be seen to be interfering with the rights of the parties and to intrude into the powers of the singapore supreme court judge of appeal quoted from, not sure if this is acceptable. the jurisdiction because the defendant or vessel concerned was amendable to the court's exist would also be futile. 11 see note 2. ities that have caused no harm in the final analysis. there must be more than technical meanwhile, in government of the republic of the philippines v. philippine international all its implications. in the end, the court was guided by the law and legislative history (i.e. also, as the courts of the jurisdiction where the arbitration is held and where the award sel, with delivery fixed at a certain date. under the moa terms of payment, the plaintiff (iama), the hong kong institute of arbitrators (hkiarb), the arbitration association of in the subsequent front carriers case,12 37 see note 35 at paras. 30-34. the subsequent high court case of aloe vera of america, inc v. asianic food (s) pte a `technical breach', then the award would not be set aside. the court stated that: [i]n in the case relating to an application to dismiss under section 48 of the arbitration act or real prejudice caused by the alleged breach. while this is obviously a lower hurdle by justice judith prakash and the with siac deputy chairman, professor lawrence boo, delivering the keynote address for the proceedings". similarly, the reasoning will apply to an application for interim payment
Recent Developments in Singapore on International Commercial Arbitration