Search for:
Category

Singapore

Category

Certain arbitration rules, such as Article 22.1(vii) of the London Court of International Arbitration Rules (“LCIA Rules 2014”), provide for a “forced joinder.” This empowers an arbitral tribunal to order a consenting third party to be joined to extant arbitration proceedings, provided that an existing party also consents to the joinder, even if the other parties to the arbitration proceedings object. However, what constitutes the requisite “consent” and how may such “consent” be established? In…

In brief The principles of natural justice in the context of international arbitration are well established. Every party has the fundamental right to be heard – i.e. the right to present its case, and the right to respond to the case against it. Consequently, a party deprived of such a right will succeed in an application to set aside an arbitral award if the breach of this fundamental right was connected to the making of…

On 6 October 2020, the International Arbitration (Amendment) Act (the “Act”) was passed by the Singapore Parliament. The International Arbitration Act (the “IAA”) was last amended in 2012. The arbitration landscape has significantly changed since then. In particular, Singapore has experienced a growing number of multi-party arbitrations, which may be delayed or stalled if the parties are unable to agree on a mechanism to appoint the tribunal, since the IAA did not provide for any…

In brief In BWG v. BWF,[1] the Court of Appeal considered whether a party involved in multiple proceedings under a chain of contracts is permitted to raise potentially inconsistent arguments to pursue a claim against a downstream purchaser on the one hand and to defend a claim against an upstream seller on the other hand. The Court of Appeal held that where a party takes inconsistent positions in the same or related proceedings, this may…