DAY v DAZ: Stay of Court Proceedings under International Arbitration Act
In DAY v DAZ, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by DAZ against the Assistant Registrar's decision to dismiss its application for a stay of proceedings in favor of arbitration, pursuant to s 6 of the International Arbitration Act. The central issue was whether the dispute fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement. The court allowed the appeal, ordering a stay of proceedings pursuant to s 6 of the IAA.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding stay of proceedings in favor of arbitration. The court allowed the appeal, ordering a stay under s 6 of the IAA.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DAY | Claimant | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Vergis S Abraham, Zhuo Jiaxiang, Veluri Hari |
| DAZ | Defendant, Appellant | Corporation | Appeal Allowed | Won | Aw Hon Wei, Adrian, Anand Shankar Tiwari s/o Sivakant Tiwari |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chua Lee Ming | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Vergis S Abraham | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Zhuo Jiaxiang | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Veluri Hari | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Aw Hon Wei | Resource Law LLC |
| Adrian | Resource Law LLC |
| Anand Shankar Tiwari s/o Sivakant Tiwari | Resource Law LLC |
4. Facts
- Claimant and defendant entered into a funding agreement on 28 October 2019.
- The funding agreement contained an arbitration clause (GT 14) and specific terms (ST 3.3 and ST 3.4) for dispute resolution.
- A dispute arose over whether ST 3.3 and ST 3.4 applied to a draft settlement agreement.
- The claimant sought specific performance of ST 3.3, while the defendant sought a stay of proceedings in favor of arbitration.
- The Assistant Registrar dismissed the defendant's application for a stay.
- The defendant appealed the Assistant Registrar's decision.
5. Formal Citations
- DAY v DAZ, Originating Application No 189 of 2023 (Registrar’s Appeal No 77 of 2023), [2023] SGHC 185
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Funding agreement entered into | |
| Arbitration proceedings commenced against Co1 | |
| Final award issued in favor of the defendant | |
| Co1 applied to set aside parts of the final award | |
| Defendant's solicitors sent a draft settlement agreement to Co1's solicitors | |
| Co1 agreed to the terms of the draft settlement agreement | |
| Defendant informed the claimant it would not enter the draft settlement agreement | |
| Claimant put the defendant on notice for breach of the LFA | |
| Defendant replied stating it did not wish to enter the draft settlement agreement | |
| Claimant filed OA 189 seeking specific performance of ST 3.3 | |
| Defendant filed SUM 860 for a stay of the action in OA 189 | |
| Assistant Registrar dismissed the defendant's application for a stay of proceedings | |
| Defendant lodged an appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision | |
| Judgment delivered | |
| Judgment delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Stay of Court Proceedings
- Outcome: The court allowed the appeal and ordered a stay of proceedings pursuant to s 6 of the IAA.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2016] 1 SLR 373
- Interpretation of Arbitration Agreement
- Outcome: The court interpreted the arbitration agreement to include disputes over the applicability of specific terms.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2021] 3 SLR 1422
- [2020] 1 SLR 1043
8. Remedies Sought
- Specific performance of ST 3.3 of the LFA
- Stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration
9. Cause of Actions
- Specific Performance
10. Practice Areas
- Arbitration
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tomolugen Holdings Ltd and another v Silica Investors Ltd and other appeals | High Court | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 373 | Singapore | Cited for the principles applicable to a stay application under s 6 of the IAA. |
| Silverlink Resorts Ltd v MS First Capital Insurance Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2021] 3 SLR 1422 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that parties can agree to resolve certain disputes by arbitration and others by litigation. |
| BXH v BXI | High Court | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 1043 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court ought to give effect to the parties' intention to have matters resolved by arbitration. |
| Seeley International Pty Ltd v Electra Air Conditioning BV | Federal Court of Australia | Yes | [2008] FCA 29 | Australia | Discussed in relation to the interpretation of carve-outs from arbitration agreements. |
| Maxx Engineering Works Pte Ltd v PQ Builders Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 71 | Singapore | Discussed in relation to the interpretation of dispute resolution clauses. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| International Arbitration Act (2020 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Arbitration Agreement
- Stay of Proceedings
- International Arbitration Act
- Funding Agreement
- Dispute Resolution
- Settlement Agreement
- Specific Performance
15.2 Keywords
- arbitration
- stay of proceedings
- international arbitration act
- contract
- dispute resolution
16. Subjects
- Arbitration
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
17. Areas of Law
- Arbitration Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure