DFI v DFJ: Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award Dismissed; Costs Awarded to DFJ

In the Singapore International Commercial Court, Sir Vivian Ramsey IJ dismissed DFI's application to set aside an arbitral award in an arbitration with DFJ. The court ordered DFI to pay DFJ's costs of $131,516.36, finding the costs claimed by DFJ to be reasonable despite DFI's argument that the costs should be limited to the initial estimate of $40,000. The claim was to set aside the arbitral award.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL COURTOF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

1.2 Outcome

Claimant to pay the defendant the costs of these proceedings.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Singapore International Commercial Court dismissed DFI's application to set aside an arbitral award and ordered DFI to pay DFJ's costs. The court found the costs claimed by DFJ to be reasonable.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sir Vivian RamseyInternational JudgeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. The claimant applied to set aside an arbitral award.
  2. The defendant sought costs of $120,848.86 plus $10,667.50 for the cost submissions.
  3. The claimant submitted that the defendant’s costs should be limited to $40,000, the amount in the defendant’s cost estimate.
  4. The court dismissed the claimant's application.
  5. The claimant did not provide details of its own costs.
  6. The defendant's costs schedule was not criticised by the claimant.
  7. The claimant challenged the award based on the tribunal's alleged failure to consider evidence.

5. Formal Citations

    6. Timeline

    DateEvent
    Judgment issued dismissing the claimant’s application to set aside the arbitral award
    Parties filed their costs submissions
    Defendant filed its written reply submissions
    Case management bundle filed

    7. Legal Issues

    1. Reasonableness of Costs
      • Outcome: The court found the defendant's claimed costs to be reasonable and ordered the claimant to pay the full amount.
      • Category: Procedural
      • Related Cases:
        • [2023] 4 SLR 77
        • [2023] 5 SLR 264
        • [2023] 1 SLR 96

    8. Remedies Sought

    1. Setting aside of arbitral award
    2. Costs

    9. Cause of Actions

    • No cause of actions

    10. Practice Areas

    • Commercial Litigation
    • Arbitration

    11. Industries

    • No industries specified

    12. Cited Cases

    Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
    Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and another matterSingapore International Commercial CourtYes[2023] 4 SLR 77SingaporeCited for guidance on the issue of whether costs are reasonable.
    CNA v CNB and another and other mattersSingapore International Commercial CourtYes[2023] 5 SLR 264SingaporeCited to support the submission that the starting point in assessing costs in the SICC must be the costs actually incurred by the successful party rather than the cost estimate set out in the case management bundle.
    Senda International Capital Ltd v Kiri Industries LtdCourt of AppealYes[2023] 1 SLR 96SingaporeCited regarding the best evidence that the unsuccessful party can adduce to discharge its evidential burden will often be information as to the costs that it had correspondingly incurred for the matter.

    13. Applicable Rules

    Rule Name
    O 22 r 3 of the Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021

    14. Applicable Statutes

    Statute NameJurisdiction
    No applicable statutes

    15. Key Terms and Keywords

    15.1 Key Terms

    • Arbitral award
    • Costs
    • Cost estimate
    • Reasonableness
    • Case management bundle
    • Natural justice

    15.2 Keywords

    • Arbitration
    • Costs
    • Singapore International Commercial Court
    • Setting aside arbitral award

    17. Areas of Law

    16. Subjects

    • Arbitration
    • Civil Procedure
    • Costs