Singapore – the importance of expressing clearly the seat in arbitration agreements (BNA v BNB)

Lexis PSL

22 Aug 2019
The article is behind a paywall.

Arbitration analysis: The Singapore High Court dismissed an application for a declaration that a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) arbitral tribunal lacked jurisdiction over a dispute, finding that the parties had agreed to Singapore-seated arbitration under the SIAC Arbitration Rules. The judgment highlights the dangers of not clearly distinguishing the jurisdiction of arbitration agreements. Sarah J Thomas, partner at Morrison & Foerster (Hong Kong), states that practitioners must ensure clients are clear in their arbitration clauses to avoid unintended outcomes.

See the full article (registration required).



Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.