Yee Hong v Powen: Arbitrator Removal for Improper Conduct in Construction Arbitration

In Yee Hong Pte Ltd v Powen Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore dismissed Yee Hong's application to remove an arbitrator, Lim Kheng Chye, in an arbitration proceeding initiated by Powen against Yee Hong, the main contractor for a condominium project. Yee Hong alleged that the arbitrator failed to properly conduct the arbitration by proceeding with a hearing despite Yee Hong's request for further discovery and extension of time to exchange affidavits. The court, presided over by Belinda Ang Saw Ean J, found no evidence of substantial injustice caused to Yee Hong and dismissed the application with costs.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application dismissed with costs.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Yee Hong's application to remove an arbitrator for improper conduct was dismissed. The court found no substantial injustice caused by the arbitrator's actions.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Powen Electrical Engineering Pte LtdRespondentCorporationApplication DismissedWon
Yee Hong Pte LtdApplicantCorporationApplication DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
P Jeya PutraAsiaLegal LLC
Wendy LeongAsiaLegal LLC
Edwin LeeRajah and Tann
Looi Ming MingRajah and Tann

4. Facts

  1. Yee Hong was the main contractor for a condominium project.
  2. Powen was the electrical installation sub-contractor.
  3. Arbitration proceedings commenced on or about 24 June 2003.
  4. Yee Hong sought further discovery of documents.
  5. Yee Hong requested an extension of time to exchange affidavits.
  6. The arbitrator ordered exchange of affidavits by a certain date.
  7. Yee Hong failed to exchange affidavits by the deadline.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Yee Hong Pte Ltd v Powen Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd, OM 1/2005, [2005] SGHC 114

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Arbitration proceedings commenced by Powen against Yee Hong
Lim Kheng Chye appointed as sole arbitrator
Arbitrator proposed preliminary meeting
Preliminary meeting held
Statement of Claim dated
Yee Hong submitted Defence and Counterclaim
Arbitrator requested Statement of Reply
AsiaLegal submitted Reply and Defence to Counterclaim
Arbitrator requested Statement of Reply from Rajah & Tann
Suit No 814 of 2003 commenced in the High Court
Yee Hong requested six categories of documents
Tribunal directions: affidavits of evidence-in-chief to be exchanged on 2004-12-17
Powen provided two categories of documents
Rajah & Tann said they would apply for further discovery if they did not hear positively from AsiaLegal by 2004-11-24
AsiaLegal objected to discovery
Yee Hong requested Powen to agree to exchange affidavits of evidence-in-chief on 2005-01-07
Yee Hong requested Powen to agree to exchange affidavits of evidence-in-chief on 2005-01-07
Arbitrator informed of the situation
Yee Hong informed Powen it was not ready to exchange affidavits
Rajah & Tann requested further discovery and better particulars
Mr Jeya Putra asked that the hearing of the arbitration proceed as previously directed
Urgent meeting convened by the tribunal
Arbitrator issued Directions No 1
Mr Jeya Putra informed the arbitrator that documents were sent to Rajah & Tann
Rajah & Tann stated documents forwarded were relevant to the claim
Arbitrator issued Peremptory Order to Respondents
Arbitrator issued Directions No 2
Yee Hong's application for further discovery faxed to arbitrator
Originating motion filed by Rajah & Tann on behalf of Yee Hong
Parties exchanged affidavits of evidence-in-chief
Application came up for hearing before the judge
Hearing re-scheduled
Hearing re-scheduled
Hearing re-scheduled
Last day of hearing
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Improper Conduct of Arbitration Proceedings
    • Outcome: The court found no improper conduct of arbitration proceedings.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to call for hearing of application before making order
      • Violation of rules of natural justice
  2. Excess of Power by Arbitrator
    • Outcome: The court found that the arbitrator did not act in excess of power.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Removal of Arbitrator
    • Outcome: The court found no basis for the removal of the arbitrator.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Improper conduct
      • Loss of confidence in arbitrator
      • Substantial injustice

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Removal of arbitrator

9. Cause of Actions

  • Failure to properly conduct the arbitration proceedings

10. Practice Areas

  • Arbitration
  • Construction Law
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Koh Bros Building & Civil Engineering Construction Pte Ltd v Scotts Development (Saraca) Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2002] 4 SLR 748SingaporeCited as not helpful to the present case.
Conder Structures v Kvaerner Construction LtdN/AYes[1999] ADRLJ 305United KingdomCited for the principle that loss of confidence in an arbitrator is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition of substantial injustice.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Singapore Institute of Architects Arbitration Rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 2002 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Arbitration
  • Arbitrator
  • Improper conduct
  • Discovery
  • Affidavits
  • Peremptory order
  • Substantial injustice
  • Singapore Institute of Architects Arbitration Rules

15.2 Keywords

  • arbitration
  • arbitrator
  • removal
  • improper conduct
  • construction
  • singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Arbitration95
Natural justice60
Civil Procedure40
Commercial Disputes30

16. Subjects

  • Arbitration
  • Construction Dispute
  • Civil Procedure