Is Article 16(3) of the Model Law a ‘one-shot remedy’ for non-participating respondents in international arbitrations?

• Main Author: CHAN, Darius
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2018
• Subjects: Asian Studies; Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3041; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4999/viewcontent/Is_Article_16_3__of_the_Model_Law_a_One_Shot_Remedy_for_Non_Participating_Respondents_in_International_Arbitrations____The_Singapore_Law_Gazette.pdf
• Institution: Singapore Management University

It is not uncommon for practitioners acting for claimants in an arbitration to encounter a respondent who chooses to boycott the arbitral process. In cases involving such “non-participating” respondents, what are the rights and obligations of each party? Specifically, insofar as Model Law jurisdictions are concerned, if a tribunal decides on jurisdiction as a preliminary issue must the non-participating respondent apply under Article 16(3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (Model Law) to the curial Court to review that decision, or otherwise lose the right to challenge any eventual award thereafter on jurisdictional grounds? Can the non-participating respondent surface at a later stage to set aside, or alternatively resist enforcement, of any eventual award based on jurisdictional grounds?