The draft SIAC Insolvency Arbitration Protocol sets out a procedure for arbitration at SIAC for the resolution of disputes arising in relation to insolvency proceedings. This update considers the application of the draft Protocol and reviews its key differences from the current SIAC Rules.

In DEM v DEL [2025] SGCA 1, the Court of Appeal considered among other things whether a non-participating party to an arbitration can challenge the award on grounds that the arbitrator failed to consider a point which was not put in issue.

The 7th edition of the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre came into force on 1 January 2025 and introduces new procedures and enhancements to consistently ensure fair proceedings, efficiency in the conduct of the arbitration proportionate to the amount and complexity of issues in dispute, and enforceability of any award.

A draft of the SIAC Insolvency Arbitration Protocol was released for public consultation which ended earlier this month. This update looks at the applicability and features of the Protocol which provides insolvency practitioners and parties another option to efficiently resolve insolvency disputes.

Singapore International Commercial Court has celebrated its 10th anniversary with a conference dedicated to transnational trends in commercial disputes.

This update reviews and sets out the key takeaways from the High Court decision of TrueCoin LLC v Techteryx, Ltd [2024] SGHC 296 where the court affirmed that the grant of an anti-suit injunction in favour of arbitration does not undermine comity and the risk of forum fragmentation should not be overstated especially in the context of arbitration agreements.

A core appeal of arbitration is to provide a quick and efficient adjudication. Yet, arbitral disputes are still prone to spiral into jurisdictional turf wars between tribunal and court – a phenomenon that can be aptly analogised as a “multi-body problem”. The common law courts of England, Singapore and Hong Kong have developed new dynamic principles to resolve this problem. This article looks at the paradigm shift.

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) 2025 Arbitration Rules came into force on 1 January 2025. This update highlights the key procedural mechanisms newly introduced in the Rules which clients and users of the SIAC will need to be aware of.

A core appeal of arbitration is to provide a quick and efficient adjudication. Yet, arbitral disputes are still prone to spiral into jurisdictional turf wars between tribunal and court – a phenomenon that can be aptly analogised as a “multi-body problem”. To resolve this problem, the common law courts of England, Singapore and Hong Kong have had to evolve beyond the traditional arbitral doctrines (ie, kompetenz-kompetenz, one-stop presumption, arbitrability and choice of remedies) and develop new dynamic principles (ie, centre of gravity, hiving-off and transnational estoppel). This paradigm shift epitomises the importance of expedient, effective and expansive curial intervention in determining jurisdictional challenges in international arbitration.

This update discusses a recent Court of Appeal decision in COSCO Shipping Specialized Carriers Co, Ltd v PT OKI Pulp & Paper Mills [2024] SGCA 50 which clarified the approach to be taken by courts in determining when a non-contractual dispute can be said to be “arising out of or in connection with” the contract between the parties.

Once a final award is issued, the arbitrator becomes functus officio – he/she no longer has jurisdiction over the dispute and may not issue a further award in relation to the arbitration, save for limited exceptions. However, what if an award includes conditions to be met before one party’s liability to pay accrues? The Court of Appeal in Voltas Ltd v York International Pte Ltd found that a conditional award may be a final award, and a tribunal cannot reserve its jurisdiction by implication.

The Singapore courts recently enforced a contract that was partly oral, partly written, partly implied by words or conduct, dealt only in essential terms, and was not signed or expressly confirmed by all parties. Its approach sets a precedent for how such unconventional contracts will be dealt with moving forward.

The Singapore courts recently enforced a contract that was partly oral, partly written, partly implied by words or conduct, dealt only in essential terms, and was not signed or expressly confirmed by all parties. Its approach sets a precedent for how such unconventional contracts will be dealt with moving forward.

This update discusses the recent decision of Asiana Airlines, Inc v Gate Gourmet Korea Co, Ltd and others [2024] SGCA(I) 8, in which the Court of Appeal made a significant ruling regarding the limited circumstances in which an anti-suit injunction may be granted in favour of a non-party to an arbitration agreement.