Wan Sern Metal Industries v Hua Tian Engineering: Setting Aside Arbitration Award
Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd applied to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore to set aside an arbitral award made in favor of Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd. The court, presided over by Judicial Commissioner Alex Wong Li Kok, dismissed the application, finding no valid grounds under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act 2001 to set aside the award. The case involved claims and counterclaims related to a sub-contract for a construction project.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed
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 award. The court dismissed the application, finding no valid grounds for setting aside the award.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd | Applicant | Corporation | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Application dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Wong Li Kok, Alex | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd was a sub-contractor for the Defu Industrial City project.
- Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd was Wan Sern's sub-contractor for labour supply.
- Wan Sern terminated the sub-contract with Hua Tian on 15 July 2022.
- Hua Tian lodged an adjudication application against Wan Sern under SOPA.
- Wan Sern commenced arbitration against Hua Tian.
- The Tribunal dismissed Wan Sern's claims and allowed most of Hua Tian's counterclaims.
- Wan Sern applied to set aside the arbitral award.
5. Formal Citations
- Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd v Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd, Originating Application No 1079 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 112
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Lian Beng Contract entered into | |
| Sub-Contract made between Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd and Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd | |
| Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd issued a payment claim | |
| Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd issued a payment response | |
| Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd lodged an adjudication application against Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd under SOPA | |
| Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd commenced Arbitration against Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd | |
| Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd issued a notice of termination in respect of the Sub-Contract to Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd | |
| Arbitral award No 99 of 2023 dated made in the SIAC Arbitration No 166 of 2022 | |
| Hua Tian Engineering Pte Ltd commenced HC/OA 980/2023 seeking an order to enforce the Award | |
| Order to enforce the Award was granted | |
| Wan Sern Metal Industries Pte Ltd brought an application to set aside the Award | |
| Hearing date | |
| Judgment date |
7. Legal Issues
- Setting Aside Arbitral Award
- Outcome: The court found no valid grounds under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act 2001 to set aside the award.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Scope of submission to arbitration
- Breach of agreed arbitral procedure
- Breach of natural justice
- Wrongful Termination of Sub-Contract
- Outcome: The Tribunal found that the applicant had wrongfully terminated the Sub-Contract.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Setting aside of arbitral award
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
10. Practice Areas
- Arbitration
- Construction Law
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soh Beng Tee & Co Pte Ltd v Fairmont Development Pte Ltd | Singapore courts | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 86 | Singapore | Cited for the policy of minimal curial intervention in setting aside applications. |
| TMM Division Maritima SA de CV v Pacific Richfield Marine Pte Ltd | Singapore courts | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 972 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a setting-aside application is not a guise for a rehearing of the merits. |
| L W Infrastructure Pte Ltd v Lim Chin San Contractors Pte Ltd and another appeal | Singapore courts | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 125 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court is entitled to have regard to the IAA and the Model Law in interpreting the AA. |
| GD Midea Air Conditioning Equipment Co Ltd v Tornado Consumer Goods Ltd and another matter | Singapore courts | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 271 | Singapore | Cited for the two-stage test to determine if an award should be set aside under the Scope of Submission Ground. |
| AMZ v AXX | Singapore courts | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 549 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements to show that the parties agreed on a particular arbitral procedure. |
| CDM and another v CDP | Singapore courts | Yes | [2021] 2 SLR 235 | Singapore | Cited for the five sources that will be considered in delineating the matters within the scope of the parties’ submission to arbitration. |
| CAJ and another v CAI and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 1 SLR 505 | Singapore | Clarified that the five sources are not discrete or independent sources. |
| CJA v CIZ | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 2 SLR 557 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court must look at matters in the round to determine whether the issues in question were live issues in the arbitration. |
| CKH v CKG and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 2 SLR 1 | Singapore | Highlighted that the relevant test is what the parties, viewing the whole position and the course of events objectively and fairly, may be taken to have accepted between themselves and before the tribunal. |
| BZW and another v BZV | Singapore courts | Yes | [2022] 1 SLR 1080 | Singapore | Cited for the two situations in which the fair hearing rule may be breached. |
| AKN and another v ALC and others and other appeals | Singapore courts | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 488 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an inference must be shown to be clear and virtually inescapable. |
| China Machine New Energy Corp v Jaguar Energy Guatemala LLC and another | Singapore courts | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 695 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that what natural justice demands turns in part on the parties’ particular agreement to arbitrate. |
| Glaziers Engineering Pte Ltd v WCS Engineering Construction Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 1311 | Singapore | Cited for the scenario where the outcome came as a surprise, which was in turn indicative of a breach of the fair hearing rule. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Arbitration Act 2001 | Singapore |
| Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Arbitration
- Arbitral Award
- Setting Aside
- Sub-Contract
- SOPA
- Natural Justice
- Scope of Submission
- Arbitral Procedure
- Wrongful Termination
- Expectation Damages
15.2 Keywords
- arbitration
- setting aside
- construction
- contract
- singapore
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Arbitration
- Construction Dispute
- Contract Law