• postimage

    12:56 PM Tan Xi-en Rachel (Research Assistant at the Centre for International Law and Incoming Practice Trainee at Rajah and Tann LLP) and Professor Lucy Ferguson Reed (Director, Centre for International Law and Professor, NUS Faculty of Law)

    Developing Singaporean Jurisprudence on Reviewing Investor-State Arbitral Awards: Kingdom of Lesotho v Swissbourgh Diamond Mines (Pty) Limited and others [2017] SGHC 195

    Kingdom of Lesotho v Swissbourgh Diamond Mines (Pty) Limited and others (“Lesotho v Swissbourgh”) is the first case in which the Singapore High Court (“SGHC”) has set aside the final jurisdiction and merits award of an investor-State arbitral tribunal. The case was brought before the SGHC in Originating Summons No 492 (“OS 492”), in which the plaintiff, the Kingdom of Lesotho (“Lesotho”), successf...

  • postimage

    04:40 PM Wu Junneng (LLB (Hons), University of Bristol)

    Shipowner’s lien and interim measures of protection in aid of International Arbitration – Reflections from The Moscow Star and Five Ocean Corp v Cingler Ship Pte Ltd

    National Courts are empowered to order interim measures of protection in aid of international arbitrations where the arbitral tribunal is unable to act effectively. This power applies equally to both seats and non-seats of arbitration. In Singapore, such interim measures of protection include inter alia making orders for preservation, interim custody or sale of any property which is, or forms, par...

  • postimage

    11:06 PM Hairul Hakkim and Leong Hoi Seng Victor (Justices’ Law Clerks)

    When will a stay of court proceedings be granted in favour of arbitration? – interpreting “null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed”

    When can a party successfully avoid court proceedings in favour of arbitration? This is an issue frequently encountered by the Singapore courts in the context of international commercial arbitrations. But what is not entirely clear is the scope of the terms “null and void”, “inoperative” and “incapable of being performed” (“the three limbs”) in requirement (c). This is the topic that we propose to...

  • postimage

    09:08 PM Leong Hoi Seng Victor (Justices’ Law Clerk, Supreme Court of Singapore)

    Examining the “special circumstances” test in BLY v BLZ [2017] SGHC 59: when should jurisdictional challenges result in stays of the arbitral proceedings?

    In BLY v BLZ and another [2017] SGHC 59 (“BLY”), the High Court considered a little-considered question arising under section 10(9) of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143, 2002 Rev Ed) (“IAA”). Two parties had gone to arbitration. The tribunal rendered its finding on jurisdiction, which one party then challenged in the High Court. The challenging party invited the Court to exercise its disc...

  • postimage

    07:11 PM Wu Junneng and Tan Tian Hui (Rajah and Tann Singapore LLP)

    Of prima facie standard(s), bare arbitration clauses and constituting arbitral tribunals: KVC Rice Intertrade Co Ltd v Asian Mineral Resources Pte Ltd and another suit [2017] SGHC 32

    A bare arbitration clause is an arbitration clause that does not specify the place or means of appointing arbitrators. It may also not specify the seat of arbitration and in which case, two interesting questions arise. First, how is a Court that has yet to be seized with jurisdiction deal with a request to refer the dispute to arbitration? Second, what is the extent to which the International Arbi...