The arbitration agreement

Improper hedging and insufficient proof—setting aside attempt fails (DNO v DNP)

Arbitration analysis: In another decision affirming the narrow scope of curial intervention under Singapore law, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) dismissed an application by DNO to set aside an SIAC arbitral award (Award). The SICC rejected the natural justice ground because, among other reasons, DNO improperly ‘warehoused’ its natural justice objection to be raised only if the eventual award was unfavourable, and instead showed willingness to continue to arbitrate. Such ‘hedging’ was inimical to the arbitral process, and therefore DNO could not raise the objection after the Award was issued. The SICC also rejected DNO’s public policy challenge. Among other reasons, DNO failed to prove the alleged breach of foreign law. In any event, a mere breach of foreign law was, by itself, insufficient. DNO needed but failed to show that upholding the Award would cross the extremely high threshold of conflicting with Singapore’s most basic notions of morality and justice. Written by Eden LI, partner at WongPartnership LLP.

Spanish Supreme Court confirms arbitrator's conviction for defying cease order

The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Spain has upheld the conviction of lawyer, Gonzalo S.C. for the offence of disobedience, confirming a six-month prison sentence and a one-year disqualification from acting as an arbitrator. The conviction stems from his failure to comply with a July 2021 order from the High Court of Justice of Madrid, which instructed him to cease his role in an arbitration between the State of Malaysia and the heirs of the Sultan of Jolo concerning territory in northern Borneo. Despite the order, Gonzalo S.C. continued the arbitration process, relocating its seat to Paris and issuing a final award in February 2022 that required Malaysia to pay $15bn. The High Court of Justice of Madrid had previously annulled his appointment due to procedural irregularities, specifically the violation of summons guarantees for foreign states. The Supreme Court rejected his appeal, dismissing claims of jurisdictional interference and improper conduct by the Lawyer of the Administration of Justice, and concluded that the appellant knowingly disregarded a binding judicial mandate, thereby attempting to override judicial authority.

Insolvency and Arbitration—limited effects of arbitration clauses on liquidators (VALLOEBY v SCP [U]-BAUJET)

Arbitration analysis: The Bordeaux Court of Appeal upheld French jurisdiction over a claim by Sea Tankers Management (STM)’s liquidator for the wrongful termination of ship management contracts despite the presence of arbitration clauses therein. The liquidator sued Maltese entities of the [Localité 12] Group, alleging that their tortious conduct, including the wrongful termination of these contracts, caused STM’s insolvency. The court found the arbitration clauses to be ‘manifestly inapplicable’ under Article 1448 of the French Code of Civil Procedure because the dispute fell outside their scope. The court considered that the dispute was based on tort (Article 1240 of the French Civil Code), not contract, and that the liquidator was acting on behalf of the creditors (third parties to the contracts) rather than STM itself. The decision highlights how, under French law, a liquidator’s dual capacity can limit the effect of arbitration clauses in cross border insolvency cases, especially when claims involve creditor interests. Written by Veronika Timofeeva, senior associate at Freshfields, and Mathilde Allard, Associate at Freshfields.

HKIAC appointed as adjudicator nominating body under Security of Payment Ordinance

The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) has been appointed by the Development Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) as an adjudicator nominating body (ANB) under the Construction Industry Security of Payment Ordinance. The Ordinance, which came into full effect on 28 August 2025, aims to facilitate payment recovery under construction contracts and to provide a mechanism for resolving payment disputes through adjudication proceedings. HKIAC has established a qualified panel of adjudicators under the Ordinance and is authorised to perform ANB functions, including the appointment of adjudicators. The Ordinance applies to main construction contracts valued at HK$5m or more and to main contracts for the supply of goods or services related to construction work valued at HK$500,000 or more. Sub-contracts within the same supply chain as applicable main contracts are also covered by the Ordinance.