Under the arbitration framework, there are prescribed grounds on which arbitral awards may be set aside before the courts. In DSQ v DSR [2026] SGHC 67, the Singapore High Court examined, and rejected, two of the key grounds commonly relied on in challenges to arbitral awards – lack of jurisdiction and breach of natural justice – demonstrating the Singapore court’s strong pro-arbitration approach through its policy of minimal curial intervention.
Here, the Employer and the Contractor in a railway project had entered a contract which contained a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause, requiring certain pre-arbitration procedures before a dispute could be submitted for arbitration. The matter involved six disputes which eventually went before an arbitral tribunal (“Tribunal“), in which the Tribunal found in favour of the Contractor (“Award“). The Employer sought to set aside the Award before the Court, alleging that: (i) the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction and that (ii) the Tribunal breached natural justice in relation to the Award.
The Court dismissed the Employer’s application, upholding the Award. On the issue of jurisdiction, the Court found that the Employer was precluded from raising the jurisdictional challenge as the Tribunal had already made a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction, and the Employer had failed to challenge it within 30 days as required under the relevant legislation. In any event, the Court agreed with the Tribunal’s decision that it had jurisdiction over the disputes.
On the issue of natural justice, the Court dismissed the Employer’s complaints, finding that the Tribunal had not breached natural justice in issuing the Award.
The Contractor was successfully represented in these proceedings by Kelvin Poon SC, V Bala, Divyesh Menon, Ho Linming and Vanessa Ku of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP.
For more information, click here to read the full Legal Update.
Visit Arbitration Asia for insights from our thought leaders across Asia concerning arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, ranging from legal and case law developments to market updates and much more.
Disclaimer
Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of member firms with local legal practices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Our Asian network also includes our regional office in China as well as regional desks focused on Brunei, Japan and South Asia. Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local requirements.
The contents of this publication are owned by Rajah & Tann Asia together with each of its member firms and are subject to all relevant protection (including but not limited to copyright protection) under the laws of each of the countries where the member firm operates and, through international treaties, other countries. No part of this publication may be reproduced, licensed, sold, published, transmitted, modified, adapted, publicly displayed, broadcast (including storage in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently for any purpose save as permitted herein) without the prior written permission of Rajah & Tann Asia or its respective member firms.
Please note also that whilst the information in this publication is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as legal advice or a substitute for specific professional advice for any particular course of action as such information may not suit your specific business and operational requirements. You should seek legal advice for your specific situation. In addition, the information in this publication does not create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on the information in this publication.
