Galsworthy Ltd v Glory Wealth Shipping: Setting Aside Order to Enforce Arbitral Award
Galsworthy Ltd of the Republic of Liberia sought to enforce an arbitral award in Singapore against Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Ltd. The High Court of Singapore, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck, dismissed Glory Wealth Shipping's appeal against the decision of the Assistant Registrar, which had dismissed their application to set aside the order granting leave to enforce the arbitral award. The underlying dispute arose from a time charter agreement and a subsequent sub-charter, both of which were not performed, leading to arbitration in London. The court found that Glory Wealth Shipping had already elected to challenge the award in English courts and was therefore not entitled to make a similar application in Singapore. The court also found that Glory Wealth Shipping had not sufficiently established grounds to set aside the order to enforce the award.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Galsworthy Ltd sought to enforce an arbitral award against Glory Wealth Shipping. The court dismissed Glory Wealth Shipping's appeal to set aside the enforcement order.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Galsworthy Ltd of the Republic of Liberia | Respondent | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Won | |
| Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Ltd | Appellant, Defendant | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | J | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Galsworthy chartered a vessel to GWS under a time charter.
- GWS sub-chartered the vessel to Worldlink Shipping Limited.
- Both charters were not performed, leading to disputes.
- Disputes were referred to separate London Arbitrations.
- The Tribunal issued a Final Award against GWS for US$1,114,406.82 and US$39,393,745.03.
- GWS applied to challenge the Final Award in the English court but did not furnish security.
- Galsworthy obtained leave to enforce the Final Award in Singapore.
5. Formal Citations
- Galsworthy Ltd of the Republic of Liberia v Glory Wealth Shipping Pte Ltd, Originating Summons No 337 of 2010 (Registrar's Appeal No 267 of 2010), [2010] SGHC 304
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Head Charter dated | |
| Sub-Charter dated | |
| Charter period terminated | |
| Final Award issued | |
| GWS applied to challenge the Final Award in English court | |
| Galsworthy applied for security for costs | |
| Appeal dismissed in English court | |
| Security for costs granted | |
| GWS's application dismissed | |
| Galsworthy obtained leave to enforce the Final Award | |
| GWS applied to set aside the order granting leave to enforce | |
| Application heard | |
| Application dismissed by the AR | |
| Appeal dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforcement of Arbitral Award
- Outcome: The court dismissed the appeal to set aside the order granting leave to enforce the arbitral award.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Setting aside order to enforce
- Decision beyond scope of submission
- Arbitral procedure not in accordance with agreement
- Public policy
- Related Cases:
- [2003] 3 SLR(R) 1
- [2006] 3 SLR(R) 174
- [2010] SGHC 151
- [2010] 2 WLR 805
- [2010] SGHC 108
- [1999] 2 HKC 205
- [1995] 3 SLR(R) 354
- Abuse of Process
- Outcome: The court found that GWS's application to set aside the order granting leave to enforce amounted to an abuse of process because they had already elected to proceed in the English courts.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2003] 3 SLR(R) 1
- [2006] 3 SLR(R) 174
8. Remedies Sought
- Enforcement of Arbitral Award
- Setting aside order to enforce
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Arbitration
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newspeed International Ltd v Citus Trading Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a party seeking to challenge an arbitration award has alternative courses of action: apply to the supervising court or the enforcement court, but not both cumulatively. |
| Aloe Vera American v Asianic Food (S) Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2006] 3 SLR(R) 174 | Singapore | Cited with approval for the principle that challenging an arbitration award can be done in either the supervising court or the enforcement court, but not both cumulatively. |
| Strandore Invest A/C and others v Soh Kim Wat | High Court | Yes | [2010] SGHC 151 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish between the two stages of enforcement proceedings and the standards required in each stage. |
| Dallah Estate and Tourism Holding Company v Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Government of Pakistan | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 2 WLR 805 | England and Wales | Cited in relation to the standard of proof required when challenging the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal. |
| Denmark Skibstekniske Konsulenter A/s I Likvidation (formerly known as Knud Hansen A/S) v Ultrapolis 300 Investments Ltd (formerly known as Ultrapolis 3000 Theme Park Investments Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2010] SGHC 108 | Singapore | Cited to support the distinction between the first stage under s 30 and the second stage under s 31 of the International Arbitration Act. |
| Hebei Export Corp v Polytek Engineering Co Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 HKC 205 | Hong Kong | Cited for the principle that enforcement of an award should only be refused if it offends notions of justice and morality. |
| Re An Arbitration Between Hainan Machinery Import and Export Corp and Donald & McArthy Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 354 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that exceptional circumstances are required to justify a refusal of enforcement of a foreign award. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Arbitration Act 1996 (c 23) (UK) | United Kingdom |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Time Charter
- Arbitral Award
- Enforcement
- Setting Aside
- International Arbitration Act
- Security for Costs
- Abuse of Process
- Market Rate
- Supervising Court
- Enforcement Court
15.2 Keywords
- arbitration
- enforcement
- shipping
- contract
- singapore
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Arbitration
- Contract Law
- Shipping Law