LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

Ng Huat Engineering Pte Ltd v Jurong Town Corp [2003] SGHC 12

The High Court dismissed Ng Huat Engineering's application for leave to appeal an arbitrator's award, affirming the arbitrator's contract interpretation and emphasizing the high threshold for challenging arbitration findings in construction and valuation disputes.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

ABC Co v XYZ Co Ltd [2003] SGHC 107

The court held that an application to amend an originating motion to set aside an arbitral award after the expiry of the three-month limitation period under Article 34(3) of the Model Law is governed by O 20 r 5(2) and r 5(5) of the Rules of Court, and such amendments are only pe

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Mae Engineering Ltd v Dragages Singapore Pte Ltd (fka Dragages et Travaux Publics (S) Pte Ltd) [2002] SGHC 86

The court will not stay proceedings in favour of arbitration where the defendant has no genuine dispute and is merely attempting to delay payment of an indisputable claim.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Tavica Design Pte Ltd v Schindler Lifts (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 6

In an application for a stay of proceedings in favour of arbitration, the court's task is not to evaluate the merits of the claim but to determine if a dispute exists on the face of the affidavits. If a dispute exists, the matter must be referred to arbitration.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Dermajaya Properties Sdn Bhd v Premium Properties Sdn Bhd and Another [2002] SGHC 53

The Model Law and Part II of the International Arbitration Act apply to an international arbitration seated in Singapore, and the mere adoption of institutional rules (like the UNCITRAL Rules) does not constitute an implied opting out of the IAA under the pre-amendment s 15.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Koh Bros Building and Civil Engineering Contractor Pte Ltd v Scotts Development (Saraca) Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 223

An arbitrator misconducts the proceedings by deciding a point without giving parties an opportunity to be heard on it, thereby breaching natural justice.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co Ltd v PSA Corp Ltd And Another [2002] SGHC 170

The court held that the arbitration was an international arbitration under the International Arbitration Act because the party's place of business with the closest relationship to the arbitration agreement was in Japan, not Singapore.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

WSG Nimbus Pte Ltd v Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka [2002] SGHC 104

In WSG Nimbus Pte Ltd v Board of Control for Cricket in Sri Lanka, the High Court discharged a prohibitive injunction, ruling that the balance of convenience favored the Defendants because the perishable nature of broadcast rights constituted irreparable harm not compensable by damages alone.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

John Holland Pty Ltd (fka John Holland Construction & Engineering Pty Ltd) v Toyo Engineering Corp (Japan) [2001] SGHC 48

In John Holland v Toyo Engineering [2001] SGHC 48, the High Court dismissed a motion to set aside an arbitration award, ruling that errors of law or fact do not constitute valid grounds for intervention under the Arbitration Act, reinforcing the principle of minimal curial intervention.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

PT Garuda Indonesia v Birgen Air [2001] SGHC 262

The court held that the place of arbitration remained Jakarta despite the hearing being held in Singapore, and that there was material non-disclosure in the ex parte application for leave to serve out of jurisdiction.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Transfield Shipping Inc Panama v Sino-Add (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 239

A mareva injunction may be granted where there is a real risk of dissipation of assets, and a clause in a charter-party referring to 'arbitration' in the context of 'General Average' does not necessarily constitute a general agreement to arbitrate all disputes.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Newspeed International Limited v Citus Trading Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 126

A party cannot challenge an arbitration award in the enforcing court on grounds that were already raised and rejected by the courts of the seat of arbitration.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Lum Chang Building Contractors Pte Ltd v Anderson Land Pte Ltd

An arbitral award rendered pursuant to a court-ordered reference under s 22 of the Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 1985 Rev Ed) does not require adoption by the court to be effective, and an appeal against such an award lies directly to the Court of Appeal.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Hyundai Engineering and Construction Co Ltd v Sembawang Kimtrans (S) Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 282

The High Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal an arbitration award regarding barge damage and charter hire. It held that the arbitrator's interpretation was not 'obviously wrong,' reinforcing the high threshold for judicial intervention in arbitration under the Arbitration Act.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Tan Poh Leng Stanley v Tang Boon Jek Jeffrey [2000] SGHC 260

Once an arbitrator has made a final award, they become functus officio and have no power to recall, reconsider, or reverse the substantive decision, except as provided by statute.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

L & W Building Construction Pte Ltd v King Wah Construction Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 246

The court held that a stay of proceedings pending arbitration should be granted where there is an applicable arbitration clause and disputes regarding defective works, and that the architect's certificate did not entitle the plaintiffs to summary judgment for the disputed deducti

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

L & M Concrete Specialists Pte Ltd v United Eng Contractors Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 166

An arbitration clause in a standard form contract is not incorporated into a subcontract by mere reference to the existence of the standard form document; clear and specific language is required to incorporate such a collateral agreement.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd v Hiap Hong & Company Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 160

The court has the power to vary an arbitrator's award on costs after it has determined non-cost issues in the arbitration.

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

JIANGSU OVERSEAS GROUP CO., LTD v CONCORD ENERGY PTE LTD

The court held that the Spot and Term contracts were validly concluded between the parties, and therefore the arbitration agreements contained within them were valid, granting the tribunal jurisdiction.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

ASG v ASH

An arbitrator becomes functus officio once a final award on costs is made, and lacks jurisdiction to revisit or issue fresh costs orders thereafter.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

CNQ v CNR [2022] SGHC 267

In CNQ v CNR, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Award.

Sushant Shukla· ·9 min read
Singapore

CVG v CVH [2022] SGHC 249

In CVG v CVH, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Enforcement.

Sushant Shukla· ·9 min read
Singapore

Bagadiya Brothers (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Ghanashyam Misra & Sons Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 246

In Bagadiya Brothers (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Ghanashyam Misra & Sons Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Award.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Parastate Labs Inc v Wang Li and others [2023] SGHC 48

In Parastate Labs Inc v Wang Li and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Stay of court proceedings.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read