Hyosung (HK) Ltd v Owners of Hilal I: Stay of Proceedings and Arbitration Clause Incorporation
In Hyosung (HK) Ltd v Owners of the Ship or Vessel `Hilal I`, the High Court of Singapore addressed the plaintiffs' admiralty action against the defendants for breach of contract and tort regarding a shipment of urea. The defendants sought a stay of proceedings in favor of arbitration in London, based on an arbitration clause in the charterparty. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal against the stay and allowed the defendants' appeal for the release of the arrested vessel, finding the arbitration clause adequately incorporated and no reason to continue the arrest.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed; defendants' appeal allowed.
1.3 Case Type
Admiralty
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court addressed whether an arbitration clause in a charterparty was incorporated into a bill of lading and the release of an arrested vessel.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hyosung (HK) Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Srivathsan Rajagopalan, Subashini Narayanasamy |
| Owners of the Ship or Vessel `Hilal I` | Defendant | Other | Appeal Allowed | Won | Ian Koh, Bryan Tan Kuan Ho |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Srivathsan Rajagopalan | Haridass Ho & Partners |
| Subashini Narayanasamy | Haridass Ho & Partners |
| Ian Koh | Drew & Napier |
| Bryan Tan Kuan Ho | Drew & Napier |
4. Facts
- Plaintiffs commenced an admiralty action against the defendants for breach of duty regarding a shipment of urea.
- The plaintiffs claimed under a bill of lading dated 24 February 1997.
- The defendants applied to stay the action in favor of arbitration in London.
- The bill of lading referred to an arbitration clause as per charterparty dated 7 February 1997.
- The actual charterparty was dated 6 February 1997.
- The defendants provided evidence that there was only one charterparty, dated 6 February 1997, and acknowledged the error in the bill of lading.
- The plaintiffs did not provide evidence to the contrary.
5. Formal Citations
- Hyosung (HK) Ltd v Owners of the Ship or Vessel `Hilal I`, Adm in Rem 221/1998, [2000] SGHC 268
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Charterparty dated | |
| Charterparty referred to in bill of lading | |
| Bill of lading dated | |
| Writ filed | |
| Vessel arrested | |
| Letter faxed by solicitors for the charterers | |
| Affidavit of Mr Bryan Tan filed | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Incorporation of Arbitration Clause
- Outcome: The court found that the arbitration clause was adequately set out and applied, despite a typographical error in the charterparty date.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Typographical error in charterparty date
- Adequacy of reference to arbitration clause
- Stay of Proceedings
- Outcome: The court granted a stay of proceedings in favor of arbitration.
- Category: Procedural
- Release of Arrested Vessel
- Outcome: The court ordered the release of the arrested vessel.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Tort
10. Practice Areas
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Arbitration
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Merak | N/A | Yes | [1965] 1 All ER 230 | N/A | Cited regarding the requirement for a clear and error-free clause to incorporate an arbitration clause from a charterparty into a bill of lading. |
| The Annefield | N/A | Yes | [1971] P 168 | N/A | Cited regarding the requirement for a clear and error-free clause to incorporate an arbitration clause from a charterparty into a bill of lading. |
| L & M Concrete Specialists Pte Ltd v United Eng Contractors Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2000] 4 SLR 441 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there must be sufficient identification of the document containing the arbitration clause for it to be incorporated. |
| The Nerano | N/A | Yes | [1996] 1 Lloyd`s Rep 1 | N/A | Cited to support the argument that the parties expressly referred to the incorporation of the arbitration clause itself into the bill of lading. |
| The ICL Raja Mahendra | N/A | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 329 | N/A | Cited in relation to the interpretation and application of section 6 of the International Arbitration Act. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| s 6 International Arbitration Act | Singapore |
| s 4(4)(a) High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123) | Singapore |
| s 3(1)(g) High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123) | Singapore |
| s 3(1)(h) High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Cap 123) | Singapore |
| s 7 International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Arbitration clause
- Charterparty
- Bill of lading
- Stay of proceedings
- Arrest of vessel
- Admiralty action
- Incorporation
- Typographical error
15.2 Keywords
- Admiralty
- Shipping
- Arbitration
- Stay of proceedings
- Arrest of vessel
- Incorporation clause
16. Subjects
- Admiralty and Shipping
- Arbitration
17. Areas of Law
- Admiralty Law
- Shipping Law
- Arbitration Law
- Contract Law