The Singapore CA finds that the Respondent’s set-aside application was filed more than three months after the award had been received by the parties; as the Court did not have any power to extend this time limit, the challenge was time- barred.
The Singapore High Court rejects an argument that enforcement of a partial award could be resisted on the public policy ground, and also deals with time extension applications for setting aside and resisting enforcement of awards.
The Singapore court clarifies the applicable time limits under Art.34(3) Model Law and rejects a broad range of natural justice objections as disguised appeals on the merits.
The court in BXS held that the time for making an application to set aside under Article 34(3) could not be extended. One month later, in BXY, the SICC reaches the same conclusion in respect of Article 16(3) of the Model Law.
A cross-border update of judgments dealing with challenges to arbitration awards, dealing with decisions from the courts of Hong Kong, Singapore and England.
In an important decision, a Singapore court finds that the time to bring a setting aside application under Article 34(3) of the Model Law cannot be extended.Continue Reading