Into the second year of the COVID 19 pandemic, the international arbitration remains robust and pulsating. Arbitrations continue to be held mostly remotely, using Zoom, Teams, WebEx…etc. The Singapore courts too have been busy over this period, having to consider an increasing number of references relating to arbitration, in particular for setting aside of arbitral awards.

The speaker will provide an overview of the decisions made in 2021 to identify some common issues and developing trends in this space. He intends to draw attention to several Court of Appeal decisions that could chart the conduct of arbitration in Singapore. This could include the novel and intriguing attempt by the applicant in Republic of India v Vedanta Resources plc [2021] SGCA 50, to seek court declarations which could have a collateral impact on on-going arbitrations and its reversal of the SICC’s decision in CBX v CBZ (SGCA-I) [2021] SGCA(I) 3 and setting aside the award which had allowed claims that could impact matters pending before other fora. Lessons on pleadings and counsel’s conduct and “focus” or “crux” of the disputes could also be drawn from its decision in CDM and another v CDP [2021] SGCA 45. At the High Court level, the continuing saga of Sanum and the Laotian ST Group appear in Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2021] SGHC(I) 10 where two related BIT awards made separately by a PCA tribunal and an ICSID (Additional Facility) tribunal went against the claimants. The SICC had to consider if tribunal’s decision to permit additional evidence (by way of findings in related arbitration on finding of fraud) and new allegations of bribery, corruption, and fraud, despite earlier agreement, constitute grounds for setting aside, whether such allegations could constitute new claims. Questions as to who should be the proper party, successor in interest and upon whom should the duty to identify the proper party when commencing or defending an arbitration, arose for consideration in National Oilwell Varco Norway AS (formerly known as Hydralift AS) v Keppel FELS Ltd (formerly known as Far East Levingston Shipbuilding Ltd) [2021] SGHC 124, when the High Court held that the respondent named in the arbitration (which had earlier been struck off for its company registry, upon a merger) could not enforce the award for its counter-claim against the claimant.

All these and more will provide fodder for an interesting and lively discourse.

About the Speaker

About the Moderator

Supporting Organisations

Continuing Professional Development

SILE CPD Points  Practice Area: Alternate Dispute Resolution  Training Level: General Public CPD Points: 2

 Download Brochure HERE.