Singapore: Arbitration

The In-House Lawyer Logo

This country-specific Q&A provides an overview of the legal framework and key issues surrounding arbitration law in Singapore including arbitration agreements, tribunals, proceedings as well as costs, awards and the hot topics concerning this country at present.

This Q&A is part of the global guide to Arbitration.

For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit http://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/index.php/practice-areas/arbitration/

  1. What legislation applies to arbitration in your country? Are there any mandatory laws?

    The key legislation in Singapore is the International Arbitration Act (IAA) and the Arbitration Act (AA).

    The IAA is modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law. It applies to international arbitrations seated in Singapore. It also applies to ‘an arbitration which is not an international arbitration’ if the parties agree in writing that the IAA will apply.

    The IAA does not expressly prescribe provisions from which the parties cannot derogate.
    The AA applies to domestic arbitrations held in Singapore. Parties to an international arbitration seated in Singapore may, however, agree that the AA will apply.

    The principal difference between the two statutes is that the AA provides for heightened court supervision of domestic arbitrations.

  2. Is your country a signatory to the New York Convention? Are there any reservations to the general obligations of the Convention?

    Singapore is a signatory to the New York Convention, to which it acceded in 1986. The New York Convention is annexed to the IAA as the Second Schedule. Part III (Sections 27-33) of the IAA gives effect to Singapore’s obligations under the New York Convention.

    Singapore has adopted the reciprocity principle under which New York Convention obligations are restricted to awards rendered in fellow New York Convention signatory States.

  3. What other arbitration-related treaties and conventions is your country a party to?

    In addition to various bilateral and multilateral treaties (such as the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement), Singapore has ratified the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States 1966 (ICSID Convention).

  4. Is the law governing international arbitration in your country based on the UNCITRAL Model Law? Are there significant differences between the two?

    Singapore has adopted the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law, which is annexed to the IAA as the First Schedule, with the exception of Chapter VIII thereof. IAA, Section 3(1). The 2006 amendments to the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law have not been adopted in full in Singapore, although the IAA has been amended to reflect some of the key changes made to the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law. Specifically, the definition of an arbitration agreement in writing was expanded to include an arbitration agreement recorded in any form, including electronic communication. IAA, Section 2A(4)-(5). In addition, an effective arbitration agreement is deemed to exist if one party asserts its existence in arbitral or legal proceedings and the other party does not deny the assertion. IAA, Section 2A(6). Moreover, the Singapore courts were empowered to grant interim relief in support of foreign arbitrations. IAA, Section 12A(1)(b).

  5. Are there any impending plans to reform the arbitration laws in your country?

    Currently, in Singapore there is a proposed legislation to legalise and regulate third-party funding for international arbitration. Singapore law currently prohibits third-party funding in both litigation and arbitration by application of the common law doctrines of champerty and maintenance. The new legislation, if enacted, would allow for third-party funding in international arbitration proceedings seated in Singapore and arbitration-related litigation and mediation in Singapore.

  6. What arbitral institutions (if any) exist in your country?

    The main arbitral institution in Singapore is the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC).

    The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) also has an office in Singapore.

  7. What are the validity requirements for an arbitration agreement under the laws of your country?

    Under the IAA, an arbitration agreement must meet certain requirements, namely:

    • it must be evidenced in writing, i.e., recorded in any form (Section 2A);
    • a party must not be under some incapacity at the time when the agreement was made (Section 31(2)(a)); and
    • it must be valid under the law to which the parties subjected it to or under the law of the country where the award was made (Section 31(2)(b)).
  8. Are arbitration clauses considered separable from the main contract?

    Yes. The principle of separability is reflected in the IAA. IAA, First Schedule, Article 16(1). The Singapore courts have also followed it. See, e.g., Larsen Oil and Gas Pte Ltd v Petroprod Ltd (in official liquidation in the Cayman Islands and in compulsory liquidation in Singapore) [2011] 3 SLR 414 (Singapore Court of Appeal).

  9. Can claims under more than one contract be brought in the one arbitral proceeding? Can an arbitral tribunal with its seat in your country consolidate separate arbitral proceedings under one or more contracts, and, if so, in what circumstances?

    The IAA does not address the possibility of consolidating multiple claims under multiple contracts in the same proceeding. It is also silent on consolidation of multiple arbitrations.
    The current SIAC Arbitration Rules, which came into effect on 1 August 2016, expressly address multi-contract disputes and consolidation. They provide that a party may file an application to consolidate two or more arbitrations pending under the SIAC Arbitration Rules into a single arbitration if:

    • all parties have agreed to the consolidation;
    • all the claims in the arbitrations are made under the same arbitration agreement; or
    • the arbitration agreements are compatible, and: (i) the disputes arise out of the same legal relationship(s); (ii) the disputes arise out of contracts consisting of a principal contract and its ancillary contract(s); or (iii) the disputes arise out of the same transaction or series of transactions.
  10. How is the law applicable to the substance determined?

    Under the IAA, priority is given to the parties’ choice of the substantive law applicable to their dispute. IAA, First Schedule, Article 28. In determining that law, any designation of the law or legal system of a given State shall be construed, unless otherwise expressed, as directly referring to the substantive law of that State and not to its conflict of laws rules. Failing any designation by the parties, the arbitral tribunal will determine the applicable law by reference to the appropriate choice of law rules. IAA, First Schedule, Article 28. In all cases, the arbitral tribunal must decide in accordance with the terms of the contract and take into account the usages of the trade applicable to the transaction. IAA, First Schedule, Article 28.

  11. Are any types of dispute considered non-arbitrable? What is the approach used in determining whether or not a dispute is arbitrable?

    The IAA provides that a dispute which the parties have agreed to submit to arbitration will be arbitrable unless it is contrary to public policy to do so or the subject matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the laws of Singapore. IAA, Section 11; IAA, First Schedule, Article 34(2).

    Guidance on what may be a non-arbitrable matter can be drawn from decisions of the Singapore courts. For example:

    • the Singapore Court of Appeal has held that certain disputes that arise upon the onset of insolvency, including transaction avoidance and wrongful trading, would not be arbitrable. Larsen Oil and Gas Pte Ltd v Petroprod Ltd (in official liquidation in the Cayman Islands and in compulsory liquidation in Singapore) [2011] SGCA 21 (Singapore Court of Appeal); and
    • the Singapore High Court has held that claims of minority oppression under Section 216 of the Singapore Companies Act would ‘straddle the line’ between arbitrability and non-arbitrability, and indicated that many if not most of the minority oppression claims would be non-arbitrable. Silica Investors Ltd v Tomolugen Holdings Ltd and others [2014] 3 SLR 815 (Singapore Court of Appeal).
  12. In your country, are there any restrictions in the appointment of arbitrators?

    The parties are at liberty to select any arbitrators they wish. Under the IAA, ‘[n]o person shall be precluded by reason of his nationality from acting as an arbitrator, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.’ IAA, First Schedule, Article 11(1).

    The IAA provides for a single arbitrator, if the number of arbitrators is not determined by the parties. IAA, Section 9. There is also a requirement for impartiality and independence of the arbitrators. IAA, First Schedule, Article 12.

  13. Are there any default requirements as to the selection of a tribunal?

    Under Section 9A of the IAA, in an arbitration with three arbitrators, each party shall appoint one arbitrator, and the parties shall by agreement appoint the third arbitrator. Where the parties fail to agree on the appointment of the third arbitrator within 30 days of the receipt of the first request by either party to do so, the appointment shall be made, upon the request of a party, by the appointing authority.

  14. Can the local courts intervene in the selection of arbitrators? If so, how?

    Under the IAA, if a challenge to an arbitrator is not successful, the challenging party may request the High Court in Singapore to decide on the challenge. IAA, First Schedule, Article 13(3). However, the High Court does not have the power to appoint an arbitrator; in the event a party fails to nominate an arbitrator, the President of SIAC has the power to make that appointment.

  15. Can the appointment of an arbitrator be challenged? Can an arbitrator be disqualified? What is the procedure for such challenge?

    Under the IAA, arbitrator appointments can be challenged on the grounds of impartiality or independence, or if the arbitrator does not possess qualifications agreed to by the parties. IAA, First Schedule, Article 12. An arbitrator may be challenged only if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to his or her impartiality or independence, or if he or she does not possess qualifications agreed to by the parties. A party may challenge an arbitrator appointed by it, or in whose appointment the party has participated, only for reasons of which the party becomes aware after the appointment has been made.
    The parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging an arbitrator. IAA, First Schedule, Article 13(1). Failing such agreement, a party who intends to challenge an arbitrator shall, within fifteen days after becoming aware of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal or after becoming aware of the circumstance in question, send a written statement of the reasons for the challenge to the arbitral tribunal. Unless the challenged arbitrator withdraws from his or her office or the other party agrees to the challenge, the arbitral tribunal shall decide on the challenge. IAA, First Schedule, Article 13(2). If a challenge of an arbitrator is not successful, the challenging party may request the High Court in Singapore to decide on the challenge. IAA, First Schedule, Article 13(3).

  16. Are arbitrators immune from liability?

    The IAA provides that an arbitrator shall not be liable for:

    • negligence in respect of anything done or omitted to be done in the capacity of arbitrator; and
    • any mistake in law, fact or procedure made in the course of arbitral proceedings or in the making of an arbitral award. IAA, Section 25.
  17. Is the principle of competence-competence recognised in your country? What is the approach of local courts towards a party commencing arbitration in apparent breach of an arbitration agreement?

    The principle of competence-competence is reflected in the IAA in the following terms: ‘The arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.’ IAA, First Schedule, Article 16(1).

    This principle has been embraced by the Singapore judiciary without reservation. Aloe Vera of America, Inc v Asiatic Food (S) Pte Ltd and anor [2006] 3 SLR(R) 174 (Singapore High Court) (‘It is an accepted principle of arbitration law that an arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to determine whether a particular person is a party to an arbitration agreement. This is referred to as the doctrine of Kompetenz-Kompetenz … [which] state[s] that an arbitral tribunal has power to rule on its own competence and to continue with the arbitration if it considers itself competent to do so.’).

    The principle of competence-competence has its limits, however. While Singapore law recognises that an arbitral tribunal is competent to determine whether it has jurisdiction and the scope of that jurisdiction, rulings on jurisdiction are subject to review by the Singapore High Court. IAA, Section 10(3).

  18. How are arbitral proceedings commenced in your country? Are there any key provisions under the arbitration laws relating to limitation periods of which the parties should be aware?

    Under the IAA, subject to any agreement to the contrary (including institutional rules), arbitration proceedings will commence on the date on which the respondent receives a request for the dispute to be referred to arbitration. IAA, First Schedule, Article 21.
    The Singapore Limitation Act applies to arbitration proceedings in the same way as to Singapore court proceedings. IAA, Section 8A(1). Consequently, for contract or tort cases governed by the substantive law of Singapore, the statutory limitation period for the commencement of claims is six years. Singapore Limitation Act, Section 6(1)(a).

    The Singapore Foreign Limitation Periods Act 2012 also applies to arbitral proceedings as it does to court proceedings. IAA, Section 8A(1). This provides that foreign limitation periods are applicable to cases involving foreign substantive law, unless such application conflicts with public policy or causes undue hardship to a person who is a party to the proceedings. Singapore Foreign Limitation Periods Act 2012, Sections 3–4.

  19. What is the applicable law (and prevailing practice) where a respondent fails to participate in the arbitration? Can the local courts compel parties to arbitrate? Can they order third parties to participate in arbitration proceedings?

    Under the IAA, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, if, without showing sufficient cause:

    • the claimant fails to communicate its statement of claim, the arbitral tribunal shall terminate the proceedings;
    • the respondent fails to communicate its statement of defense, the arbitral tribunal shall continue the proceedings without treating such failure in itself as an admission of the claimant’s allegations; or
    • any party fails to appear at a hearing or to produce documentary evidence, the arbitral tribunal may continue the proceedings and make the award on the evidence before it. IAA, First Schedule, Article 25.

    The IAA is silent on whether Singapore courts can compel parties to arbitrate if they fail to participate in the arbitration. If a party initiates court proceedings for matters covered by an arbitration agreement, the Singapore courts can stay the court proceedings and compel that party to arbitrate instead. IAA, Section 6.

    The IAA does not contain specific provisions on ordering third parties to participate in arbitration proceedings. In Singapore, the common law principle that arbitration is a creature of contract made between consenting parties is well-established. As such, generally, third parties which have not signed an arbitration agreement cannot be compelled to arbitrate.

  20. In what instances can third parties or non-signatories be bound by an arbitration agreement or award (e.g. by joinder)?

    The IAA does not expressly provide for the possibility of third parties or non-signatories being bound by an arbitration agreement or award. It is silent on joinder.

    A third party can be joined to an arbitration under the SIAC Arbitration Rules. A party or non-party may file an application with the Registrar for one or more additional parties to be joined in an arbitration pending under the SIAC Rules as claimant or respondent, provided that: (i) the additional party to be joined is prima facie bound by the arbitration agreement; or (ii) all parties, including the additional party to be joined, have consented to the joinder of the additional party. The party or non-party applying for joinder must at the same time as it files its application for joinder with the Registrar, send a copy of the application to all parties. SIAC Arbitration Rules, Rule 7. Notably, the SIAC Arbitration Rules refer expressly to the rights of ‘non-parties’ to apply to be joined to a pending arbitration (i.e., by intervention).

  21. What interim measures are available? Will local courts issue interim measures pending the constitution of the tribunal?

    The IAA provides that an arbitral tribunal shall have the power to make any interim measure. IAA, Section 12. The specific powers granted to the arbitral tribunal are to make orders or give directions to any party for:

    • security for costs;
    • discovery of documents and interrogatories;
    • giving of evidence by affidavit;
    • the preservation, interim custody or sale of any property which is or forms part of the subject-matter of the dispute;
    • samples to be taken from, or any observation to be made of or experiment conducted upon, any property which is or forms part of the subject-matter of the dispute;
    • the preservation and interim custody of any evidence for the purposes of the proceedings;
    • securing the amount in dispute;
    • ensuring that any award which may be made in the arbitral proceedings is not rendered ineffectual by the dissipation of assets by a party; and
    • an interim injunction or any other interim measure.

    In Singapore, the courts also have power to grant the following interim relief:

    • giving of evidence by affidavit;
    • the preservation, interim custody or sale of any property which is or forms part of the subject-matter of the dispute;
    • samples to be taken from, or any observation to be made of or experiment conducted upon, any property which is or forms part of the subject-matter of the dispute;
    • the preservation and interim custody of any evidence for the purposes of the proceedings;
    • securing the amount in dispute;
    • ensuring that any award which may be made in the arbitral proceedings is not rendered ineffectual by the dissipation of assets by a party; and
    • an interim injunction or any other interim measure.

    The IAA does not, however, provide expressly for the power of the Singapore courts to grant interim orders for security for costs, discovery of documents, or interrogatories. IAA, Section 12A(2).

    If the case is one of urgency, the Singapore courts may, prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, grant certain orders that the court thinks are necessary for the purpose of preserving evidence or assets. IAA, Section 12A(4). The court will only grant interim relief prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal in non-urgent cases if the application for interim relief is made with the written agreement of the other parties. IAA, Section 12A(5). In all applications for interim relief, the court will exercise its discretion when considering the request by applying the American Cyanamid principles. Namely, it will consider: (i) whether there is a serious issue to be tried; (ii) whether damages would be an adequate remedy if interim relief were not granted; and (iii) where the balance of convenience lies. See, e.g., Da Vinci Collection Pte Ltd v Richemont International SA [2006] 3 SLR(R) 560 (Singapore Court of Appeal).

    Singapore law on sovereign immunity prohibits injunctions against a State. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 15(2). It is, however, possible for the State to waive its immunity against injunctions by way of an express written waiver. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 15(3).

  22. Are there particular rules governing evidentiary matters in arbitration? Will the local courts in your jurisdiction play any role in the obtaining of evidence?

    There are no specific provisions in the IAA on evidentiary matters in arbitration. In practice, arbitrators routinely refer to the International Bar Association Rules on Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration.

    The IAA does not expressly grant arbitral tribunals the power to order discovery from non-parties. However, parties wishing to obtain evidence from non-parties may be able to obtain an order from the Singapore courts to do so. Under the IAA, the Singapore High Court may order that a subpoena to testify or a subpoena to produce documents be issued. IAA, Section 13.

  23. What ethical codes and other professional standards, if any, apply to counsel and arbitrators conducting proceedings in your country?

    There are no specific ethical codes or standards that apply to arbitration proceedings in Singapore.

    The Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules set out the rules of professional conduct for every advocate and solicitor holding a valid practising certificate. It sets certain standards for legal professionals practising in Singapore, including that the legal professional will maintain the independence and integrity of the profession and that he or she will act in the best interest of his or her clients.

    Arbitrators appointed by SIAC are required to abide by SIAC’s Code of Ethics for an Arbitrator. Among other things, this requires arbitrators to disclose any facts or circumstances that may give rise to doubts as to his or her impartiality and to keep all information acquired during the course of the proceedings confidential.

  24. How are the costs of arbitration proceedings estimated and allocated?

    The IAA grants power to the arbitral tribunal to award costs. IAA, Section 20(1)(c). It is, however, silent on how costs are estimated and allocated.

    Under Section 10(7) of the IAA, in making a decision that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction, the arbitral tribunal, the High Court or the Court of Appeal (as the case may be) may make an award or order of costs of the proceedings, including the arbitral proceedings, against any party.

  25. Can interest be included on the principal claim and costs incurred?

    Under Section 20 of the IAA, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, an arbitral tribunal may award simple or compound interest from such date, at such rate and with such rest as the arbitral tribunal considers appropriate, for any period ending not later than the date of payment on the principal claim and costs incurred.

  26. Does the law impose limits on the available remedies? Are some remedies not enforceable by the local courts?

    Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may award any remedy or relief that could have been ordered by the court if the dispute had been the subject of civil proceedings in that court. IAA, Section 12(5). The arbitral tribunal is therefore given far-reaching discretion to grant remedies it deems appropriate.

  27. What legal requirements are there in your country for the recognition of an award?

    Under the IAA, the recognition or enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused only for the specific reasons set out in Article V of the New York Convention. IAA, Second Schedule, Article V. These grounds are:

    • a party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity; or the said agreement is not valid;
    • the party against whom the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case;
    • the award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration, provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated from those not so submitted, that part of the award which contains decisions on matters submitted to arbitration may be recognized and enforced;
    • the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with the law of the country where the arbitration took place;
    • the award has not yet become binding on the parties or has been set aside or suspended by a court of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made;
    • the subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the law of this State; or
    • the recognition or enforcement of the award would be contrary to the public policy of this State.

    There are additional requirements as to the form and contents of the award:

    • the award must be in writing and signed;
    • the award must state the reasons on which it is based, unless the parties have agreed that no grounds are to be stated or the award is based on agreed terms; and
    • the date of the award and place of arbitration must be stated in the award. IAA, First Schedule, Article 31.
  28. Can arbitration proceedings and awards be appealed or challenged in local courts? What are the grounds and procedure?

    Under the IAA, a party can apply to the court to have an award set aside if any of the following applies:

    • a party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity;
    • the arbitration agreement is not valid;
    • the party against whom the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case;
    • the award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration;
    • the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with Singapore law;
    • the subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Singapore law;
    • the award is in conflict with the public policy of Singapore;
    • the making of the award was induced or affected by fraud or corruption; or
    • a breach of the rules of natural justice occurred in connection with the making of the award by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced. IAA, Section 24.

    The jurisprudence of the Singapore courts serves as a useful guide to the limited grounds upon which the Singapore courts will set aside arbitral awards. The courts will not allow a party to ‘dress up their unhappiness’ with the substantive outcome of the arbitral proceedings into an established ground for challenging an award. TMM Division Maritima SA de CV v Pacific Richfield Marine Pte Ltd [2013] SGHC 186 (Singapore High Court). However, the Court of Appeal has emphasized that while the courts infrequently exercise their power to set aside arbitral awards, they will nevertheless do so without hesitation if a statutorily prescribed ground for setting aside an arbitral award is clearly established. CRW Joint Operation v PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK [2011] 4 SLR 305 (Singapore Court of Appeal).

    In addition, the IAA provides that a party may appeal against a ruling on jurisdiction by an arbitral tribunal. IAA, Section 10. For example, recently, in Sanum Investments Limited v The Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, the Singapore Court of Appeal restored the decision by a Singapore-seated arbitral tribunal to accept jurisdiction over certain expropriation claims under the bilateral investment treaty between the People’s Republic of China and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Sanum Investments Limited v The Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2016] SGCA 57 (Singapore Court of Appeal). The Lao Government challenged the arbitral tribunal’s decision on jurisdiction in the Singapore High Court under Section 10(3)(a) of the IAA, which provides that any party may appeal against a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction by an arbitral tribunal.

  29. Can the parties waive any rights of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement before the dispute arises (such as in the arbitration clause)?

    The IAA is silent on whether the parties can waive their right of appeal or challenge to an award by agreement before the dispute arises. The issue of whether parties may contractually exclude the right to set aside an award has not been decided in Singapore. Notably, under the AA (but not the IAA), the right of appeal to court on a question of law arising out of an award may be excluded by the parties.

  30. To what extent might a state or state entity successfully raise a defence of state or sovereign immunity at the enforcement stage?

    According to the Singapore State Immunity Act, a State is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of Singapore or any arbitral tribunal or body exercising judicial functions. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 3. However, a central exception to the doctrine of sovereign immunity is the so-called commercial activity exception according to which a State is not immune where the activity in issue is a commercial one. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 5. Moreover, the Singapore State Immunity Act provides that a State will not be immune from an arbitration where it has agreed in writing to submit a dispute to arbitration. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 11(1).

    Under the Singapore State Immunity Act, a State is immune from an injunction or order for specific performance or for the recovery of land or other property. Singapore State Immunity Act, Section 15(2). Moreover, the property of a State shall not be subject to any process for the enforcement of a judgment or an arbitration award or, in an action in rem, for its arrest, detention or sale.

  31. Are there rules or restrictions on third-party funders in your country?

    Yes, third-party funding is currently prohibited in Singapore, via application of the common law doctrines of maintenance and champerty. As discussed above, there is a proposed legislation to legalise and regulate third-party funding for international arbitration.

  32. Is there a concept in your country providing for class-action or group arbitration? If so, are there any limitations to the arbitrability of such claims or requirements that must be met before such claims may be arbitrated?

    No. The IAA does not contain any provisions on class-action arbitration or group arbitration.

  33. Is diversity in the choice of arbitrators (e.g. gender, age, origin) actively promoted in your country? If so, how?

    Efforts are underway to promote diversity in the selection of arbitrators in Singapore. For example, SIAC has signed the Equal Representation Pledge, a pledge established by members of the international arbitration community that seeks to increase, on an equal opportunity basis, the number of women appointed as arbitrators in order to achieve a fair representation.

  34. Is emergency arbitrator relief available in your country? Is this actively used?

    There are no specific provisions on emergency arbitrator proceedings in the IAA.

    The SIAC Arbitration Rules provide for an emergency arbitrator procedure. SIAC Arbitration Rules, Schedule 1. Since its introduction in 2010, the emergency arbitrator procedure has been used 50 times (as at 1 June 2016). After the interest of parties in this relatively new procedure peaked in 2013 and 2014 with 31 applications in total, its usage declined in 2015 with only five applications and another three applications in the first five months of 2016. Notably, since 2012, the IAA provides for the enforceability of awards and orders issued by an emergency arbitrator in proceedings seated in Singapore or abroad. IAA, Section 2(1).

  35. Have measures been taken by arbitral institutions in your country to promote transparency in arbitration?

    In 2013, SIAC introduced a new set of rules which allowed SIAC to publish redacted awards for the first time. This was a progressive development and brought SIAC in line with the ICC regime. Shortly after the introduction of this new rule, SIAC, in collaboration with legal publisher LexisNexis, published a volume entitled Singapore Arbitral Awards 2012, described as the ‘most comprehensive set of redacted arbitral awards decided in Singapore.’

    While the new 2016 SIAC Rules retained SIAC’s ability to publish awards with all identifying information redacted, the new rules introduced a provision that requires SIAC to obtain the consent of all parties and the arbitral tribunal before it could do so. SIAC Arbitration Rules, Rule 32.12.

    In addition, SIAC is about to release the SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules which also would address confidentiality and transparency in investment arbitration. An updated draft of the SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules will follow later in the year.

    Singapore has not yet signed the 2014 United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (Mauritius Convention).

  36. Are efforts being made by arbitration institutions or local courts to impose strict deadlines for the rendering of awards?

    The IAA is silent in this regard. For expedited proceedings, the SIAC Arbitration Rules provide that an arbitral tribunal must render its award within six months from the date when the arbitral tribunal is constituted. SIAC Arbitration Rules, Rule 5.2. There are no specific efforts in this regard.

  37. Have steps been taken in your country to publish reasoned decisions on arbitrator challenges and provide more insight into the drivers behind arbitrator selection by institutions?

    No specific steps have been taken in Singapore in this regard.

  38. Are there arbitral laws or arbitration institutional rules in your country providing for simplified procedures for claims under a certain value?

    The SIAC Arbitration Rules provide for expedited procedure when the amount in dispute does not exceed S$6 million. SIAC Arbitration Rules, Rule 5.1. Rule 5.2 of the SIAC Arbitration Rules sets out the procedure for an expedited arbitration, which requires a sole arbitrator, the award to be issued within six months, and allows the arbitral tribunal to state its reasons for deciding in summary form.