- Singapore Court of Appeal set aside award made on defence raised in closing submissions for breach of natural justice (CAJ v CAI)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Arbitration analysis: The appellants, CAJ and CAK, raised a new 'extension of time' (EOT) defence in closing submissions during arbitration proceedings. The effect of the ultimately successful EOT defence was to reduce the amount of liquidated damages payable by the appellants. The respondent, CAI, applied to set aside the tribunal’s decision on the grounds that—CAI did not have a fair and reasonable opportunity to present its case in respect of the EOT defence, and the tribunal’s decision was not backed by any evidence and any reliance on its professed experience was not explained. The Singapore High Court allowed the respondent's application and set aside the tribunal's decision to grant the appellants an EOT. The Singapore Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court's finding to partially set aside the arbitral award made in breach of the principles of natural justice given tribunal's decision on the EOT defence had been made in excess of its jurisdiction and the EOT defence had not been raised earlier. The Court of Appeal did not consider the question of remission since it had found the tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction. Even if there had only been a breach of natural justice, the court did not find it appropriate to remit the matter to the tribunal. Written by Daljit Kaur, knowledge lawyer at Baker McKenzie.
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