Anwar Siraj v Ting Kang Chung: Challenge to Arbitrator's Impartiality and Competence in Construction Dispute

In Anwar Siraj and Khoo Cheng Neo Norma v Ting Kang Chung and Teo Hee Lai Building Construction Pte Ltd, the Singapore High Court heard an application to remove an arbitrator, Ting Kang Chung, in a construction dispute. The applicants, Anwar Siraj and Khoo Cheng Neo Norma, alleged bias and incompetence on the part of the arbitrator. The court dismissed the application, finding no evidence of misconduct or bias and emphasizing the arbitrator's wide discretionary powers. The applicants were ordered to pay costs to the arbitrator and the second respondent.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Originating Motion Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Arbitration

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court dismissed an application to remove an arbitrator in a construction dispute, finding no evidence of misconduct or bias. The court emphasized the arbitrator's wide discretion and the lack of real grounds for doubting impartiality.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Anwar SirajApplicantIndividualMotion DismissedLost
Teo Hee Lai Building Construction Pte LtdRespondentCorporationCosts AwardedWon
Khoo Cheng Neo NormaApplicantIndividualMotion DismissedLost
Ting Kang ChungRespondentIndividualCosts AwardedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Tay Yong KwangJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
G RamanG Raman & Partners
V SuriamurthiG Raman & Partners
S ThulasidasLing Das & Partners
Timothy NgLee & Lee
Richard TanLee & Lee
Lee Hui YanLee & Lee

4. Facts

  1. Applicants contracted with Second Respondent to demolish and reconstruct a house for $1.2 million.
  2. The agreement was signed on 30 December 1999, with a completion date of 9 January 2001.
  3. A dispute arose around July 2001, and the Second Respondent referred it to arbitration.
  4. The President of the SIA appointed the First Respondent as the arbitrator.
  5. Applicants alleged shoddy workmanship caused defects like delamination of tiles and water seepage.
  6. Applicants applied for security for costs due to the large counterclaim amount.
  7. The arbitrator sought expert advice on procedural matters, including security for costs.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Anwar Siraj and Another v Ting Kang Chung and Another, Suit 123/2003, OM 26/2002, [2003] SGHC 64

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Agreement signed for demolition and reconstruction of house
Completion date for house reconstruction project
Dispute arose
First Respondent appointed as arbitrator
Meeting convened by First Respondent
Arbitrator attended site meeting
Pleadings filed
Meeting fixed by arbitrator
Hearing for security for costs application
Applicants wrote to arbitrator to enquire about outcome of applications
Originating Motion filed
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Challenge against arbitrator
    • Outcome: The court found no evidence of misconduct or bias and dismissed the application to remove the arbitrator.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Misconduct of arbitrator
      • Bias of arbitrator
      • Incompetence of arbitrator
      • Failure to use reasonable dispatch

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Removal of arbitrator
  2. Refund of arbitrator's fee
  3. Hearing before a Judge of the High Court

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Contract

10. Practice Areas

  • Arbitration
  • Construction Disputes

11. Industries

  • Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Hagop Ardahalian v Unifert International S.A. (The ‘Elissar’)N/AYes[1984] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 84N/ACited for the objective test to determine if there are real grounds for which a reasonable person would think there is a real likelihood that the arbitrator could not or would not fairly determine the issue on the basis of the evidence and the arguments to be adduced before him.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 17Singapore
Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 18Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Arbitration
  • Arbitrator
  • Misconduct
  • Bias
  • Security for costs
  • Reasonable dispatch
  • SIA standard form contract

15.2 Keywords

  • Arbitration
  • Arbitrator
  • Misconduct
  • Bias
  • Construction Dispute
  • Singapore High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Arbitration90
Construction Law40
Civil Procedure30

16. Subjects

  • Arbitration
  • Construction Dispute
  • Removal of Arbitrator