- Singapore—application to set aside SIAC award for breach of natural justice due to tribunal’s unanticipated reasoning dismissed (CIM v CIN)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the SGHC decide?
- (i) What were the links in the tribunal’s chain of reasoning?
- (ii) What were the matters pleaded or otherwise in play?
- (iii) Whether CIN’s counsel’s silence in the face of an express misunderstanding amounted to a change of what was in play in the arbitration
- (iv) The impact of the tribunal’s own understanding of what was in play
- (v) There was no breach of natural justice as regards the Calculation of Damages Finding
- Case details
Arbitration analysis: The Singapore High Court (SGHC) dismissed an application to set aside a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) expedited arbitration award on natural justice grounds. The SGHC found that the applicant (CIM) had not been taken by surprise by the arbitrator’s chain of reasoning such that it was denied the opportunity to be heard. In particular, the SGHC rejected the argument that CIN’s silence at the hearing in the face of an erroneous characterisation of its (CIN’s) case by CIM’s counsel had the effect of changing what issues were ‘in play’ in the arbitration so as to surprise to CIM. Shaun Lee, counsel and Low Zhe Ning, associate, in the dispute resolution group at Bird & Bird ATMD LLP explain the implications of the decision of the SGHC in this case.
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