ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû

Article summary

Arbitration analysis: This case involved an appeal to the Singapore High Court challenging an ICC Arbitral Tribunal’s decision that it did not have jurisdiction over one co-respondent to the proceeding per section 10(3) of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) (IAA). The agreements at issue were governed by English law and the seat of arbitration was Singapore. The jurisdictional objection turned on whether there was a binding arbitration agreement in a situation where one of the co-respondents did not sign a contract containing an arbitration clause but still authorised a series of payments to be made under that contract. The Arbitral Tribunal held that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction over the co-respondent. Reviewing that decision de novo, the court briefly addressed the principles governing a tribunal’s jurisdiction, set forth the framework principles of English contract law for determining when performance will mean acceptance of...