Comparative Guides
Welcome to Mondaq Comparative Guides - your comparative global Q&A guide.
Our Comparative Guides provide an overview of some of the key points of law and practice and allow you to compare regulatory environments and laws across multiple jurisdictions.
Start by selecting your Topic of interest below. Then choose your Regions and finally refine the exact Subjects you are seeking clarity on to view detailed analysis provided by our carefully selected internationally recognised experts.
Results: 4 Answers
International Arbitration
12.
Award
12.1
What procedural and substantive requirements must be met by an award?
 
Singapore
The award must be in writing and be signed by the sole arbitrator or by a majority of the arbitrators (provided that the reason for any omitted signature is stated). The award must state the reasons upon which it is based, unless the parties have agreed otherwise or the award is made by consent of the parties. The award must mention the date of the award and the place of arbitration; the award is deemed to have been made at the place of the arbitration. After the award has been made, a signed copy of the award must be delivered to each party (Section 38 of the AA; Article 31 of the Model Law).

For more information about this answer please contact: Alvin Yeo and Koh Swee Yen from WongPartnership LLP

For more information about this answer please contact: Alvin Yeo from WongPartnership LLP
12.2
Must the award be produced within a certain timeframe?
 
Singapore
There is no time limit prescribed for rendering an award. Specifically, under Section 36 of the AA, the court has power to extend the time for making an award for such period and on such terms as it thinks fit when the time is limited by the arbitration agreement. There is no equivalent power under the IAA.

In this regard, the Singapore courts have held that an undue delay in the making of an award in and of itself does not suggest that the arbitrator or tribunal is partial or lacks independence, and is also not a basis on which the award may be set aside (PT Central Investindo v Franciscus Wongso [2014] 4 SLR 978).

For more information about this answer please contact: Alvin Yeo and Koh Swee Yen from WongPartnership LLP

For more information about this answer please contact: Alvin Yeo from WongPartnership LLP