PT Pukuafu Indah v Newmont Indonesia: Setting Aside Arbitral Order Under International Arbitration Act
PT Pukuafu Indah and the Merukh family applied to the High Court of Singapore to set aside an order of an arbitral tribunal pursuant to Section 24 of the International Arbitration Act and Article 34 of the Model Law. The High Court, presided over by Lee Seiu Kin J, dismissed the application, holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to annul the interim order and that the application was filed out of time. The arbitration proceedings arose from an alleged breach of a Release Agreement.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Application to set aside an arbitral order was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and being filed out of time under the IAA.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT Pukuafu Indah | Plaintiff | Corporation | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Newmont Indonesia Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Successful in opposing application | Won | |
| The Merukh Parties | Plaintiff | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| NVL (USA) Limited | Defendant | Corporation | Successful in opposing application | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Lee Seiu Kin | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- PTPI and the Merukh Parties commenced suits in Indonesian courts.
- NIL and NVL commenced arbitration proceedings against PTPI and the Merukh Parties.
- The Tribunal issued an interim order restraining PTPI and the Merukh Parties from continuing proceedings in Indonesian suits.
- The plaintiffs applied to set aside the order of the arbitral tribunal.
- The application was filed more than three months after the order was made.
5. Formal Citations
- PT Pukuafu Indah and others v Newmont Indonesia Ltd and another, Originating Summons No 351 of 2011, [2012] SGHC 187
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Suits commenced in Indonesian courts | |
| Suits commenced in Indonesian courts | |
| Loan agreement signed | |
| Release Agreement signed | |
| Proceedings began for suits before the South Jakarta District Court | |
| Proceedings began for suits before the South Jakarta District Court | |
| Proceedings began for suits before the South Jakarta District Court | |
| Arbitration Proceedings commenced | |
| Application for interim order filed | |
| Hearing for the application | |
| Order issued | |
| High Court granted leave to enforce the Order | |
| Partial Award given by the Tribunal | |
| Application filed to set aside the Order | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Jurisdiction to set aside arbitral order
- Outcome: The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to set aside the interim order because it was not an 'award' as defined under the IAA.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Sub-Issues:
- Definition of 'award' under the International Arbitration Act
- Exclusion of orders made under Section 12 of the IAA from the definition of 'award'
- Time limit for application to set aside arbitral award
- Outcome: The court held that the application was filed out of time, exceeding the three-month limit prescribed by Article 34 of the Model Law.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Interpretation of Article 34(3) of the Model Law
- Compliance with O 69A r 2(4) of the Rules of Court
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of arbitral order
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Arbitration
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Mining
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT Asuransi Jasa Indonesia (Persero) v Dexia Bank SA | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR 597 | Singapore | Approved the substance-procedure distinction in determining what constitutes an 'award' under Article 34 of the Model Law. |
| Re Arbitration Between Mohamed Ibrahim and Koshi Mohamed | N/A | Yes | [1963] MLJ 32 | N/A | Approved that the substance of the ruling is decisive, not the label given by the tribunal. |
| ABC Co v XYZ Co Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR(R) 546 | Singapore | Interpreted Article 34(3) of the Model Law regarding the time limit for setting aside an arbitral award. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| SIAC Rules 2010 |
| Rule 26.1 of the SIAC Rules |
| O 69A r 2(4) of the Rules of Court |
| O 69A r 5(2) of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Arbitral award
- Interim order
- International Arbitration Act
- Model Law
- Setting aside
- Jurisdiction
- Time limit
- Interlocutory order
15.2 Keywords
- arbitration
- international arbitration act
- interim order
- setting aside
- jurisdiction
- singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| International Arbitration Act | 90 |
| International Arbitration | 85 |
| Arbitration | 75 |
| Jurisdiction | 70 |
| Interim Measures | 65 |
| Natural justice | 60 |
| Setting aside | 55 |
| Contract Law | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Arbitration
- International Arbitration
- Civil Procedure