Setting aside an award over the mis-application of a choice of law clause: Quarella SpA v Scelta Marble Australia Pty Ltd [2012] SGHC 166
In Quarella SpA v Scelta Marble Australia Pty Ltd [2012] SGHC 166, the High Court of Singapore (per Prakash J) rejected an application to set aside two related arbitration awards. The ground for setting aside was an alleged misinterpretation of a choice of law clause by the tribunal. In rejecting th...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3034 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4992/viewcontent/Setting_aside_an_award_over_the_mis_application_of_a_choice_of_law_clause_LGUPD__2012__SLWC_18_v1.0__1_.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | In Quarella SpA v Scelta Marble Australia Pty Ltd [2012] SGHC 166, the High Court of Singapore (per Prakash J) rejected an application to set aside two related arbitration awards. The ground for setting aside was an alleged misinterpretation of a choice of law clause by the tribunal. In rejecting the application, the High Court demonstrated its unwillingness to set aside an award when the tribunal has considered and respected the choice of law clause (regardless of the interpretation the tribunal ultimately preferred). Notably, the High Court did not close the door on instances where the tribunal may have failed to apply the choice of law clause or expressly refused to apply such a clause. |
|---|