- Singapore—application to set aside award on grounds that a party was unable to present its case dismissed (CGS v CGT)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the Singapore High Court decide?
- Principles underlying a party’s right to representation in arbitration
- There was no breach of agreed procedure in (a) the correspondence between the Plaintiff and the tribunal and (b) the manner in which the tribunal handled the hearing
- The tribunal did not fail to deal with the Plaintiff’s invoice claim and thus there was no breach of natural justice
- Comments and conclusion
- Case details
Arbitration analysis: How absolute are a party’s right(s) to decide its representation in arbitration proceedings and the conduct of its case? Where an aggrieved party is of the view that its rights have been infringed, what is the effect of its silence on such during the arbitration on its ability to raise the infringement as a ground for setting aside the award? Written by Shaun Lee, counsel, and Low Zhe Ning, associate, in the dispute resolution group at Bird & Bird ATMD LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial