Growing Singapore Dispute Arbitration Sector Lures Australian Barristers
The city-state, which has been working to improve its stature as a destination for international arbitration, is now the third most preferred seat of arbitration in the world and top in the Asia-Pacific, according to a 2018 international arbitration survey.
October 07, 2019 at 05:00 AM
5 minute read
A group of Australian barristers has established chambers in Singapore, in another sign of the island city-state's growing stature as a destination for international arbitration.
Known as Maxwell 42, the permanent chambers and offices are in the heart of the international arbitration centre in Singapore and include prominent barristers such as Bret Walker SC, Mark Ambrose QC, John Sheahan QC and former Federal Court of Australia judge Roger Gyles QC.
"The birth of it really was to provide an avenue for Australian barristers to have a presence in Singapore and to offer an alternative to the London bar," said Mark Johnston, a Brisbane-based barrister who is also a member of the chambers.
London chambers, including Twenty Essex and Fountain Court, also have offices in Singapore, and Johnston said they have picked up large amounts of work on disputes arising out of Australia, particularly between international and Australian parties in the resources and project sectors.
"If you're an international company and you're doing a big project in Australia and one of the other parties is a big Australian company, rightly or wrongly, there might be a perception that you'd rather be in neutral territory," he said.
"Often the contracts have an arbitration clause and the arbitrations are seated in Singapore with the application of Australian law. Once that happens, it's opened up to the field, if you like, and the London bar, in particular, has been capturing a lot of this work from Australian projects."
The barristers will operate on what Johnston describes as a fly-in, fly-out arrangement, where he, for instance, will visit Singapore perhaps half a dozen times a year.
Arbitration has become an alternative to the court system around the world as business has become more global and as more nations have signed the New York Convention, agreeing to recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards. As of April 2018, the convention had 160 state parties.
"With the rise in cross-border commercial transactions, more cross-border differences may arise. When they do, parties need fair and efficient ways to resolve disputes in a timely manner. Singapore has developed a comprehensive suite of dispute resolution services, which includes mediation, arbitration and litigation, to support businesses in their dispute resolution needs," the Ministry of Law said in a statement.
According to the 2018 International Arbitration Survey by Queen Mary University of London and law firm White & Case, Singapore is now the third most-preferred seat of arbitration in the world, and top in Asia-Pacific. The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) is the third most-preferred arbitral institution globally and top in Asia.
New case filings at SIAC have increased fourfold during the past decade and in 2018 SIAC handled 402 cases for parties from 65 jurisdictions.
"Singapore now stands shoulder to shoulder with historic seats such as London and Paris," SIAC said in a statement.
The rise of Singapore as an arbitration destination has been the result of a concerted effort by the government. The city-state has a stable government and a trusted and stable legal system, lawyers say. And it has an open regime where lawyers from other jurisdictions are free to act in arbitrations. In addition, they note that the Ministry of Law is quick to change laws when required to facilitate arbitrations.
The government also recently opened Maxwell Chambers, a specially designed dispute resolution complex, which provides 10 custom-designed and fully equipped hearing rooms and 12 preparation rooms and the services needed to carry out arbitrations, such as transcription and interpretation.
Singapore has become an attractive destination for western companies that might not have confidence in the legal system of the country in which the other party to a dispute is based. Likewise, some Asian parties to disputes also often want "neutral" territory for their matters.
As a small nation with no natural resources and few global-scale businesses, Singapore rarely has companies that are parties in a dispute, so is seen as neutral territory, said Smitha Menon, a partner in the international arbitration and restructuring and insolvency practice at Singapore firm WongPartnership, and chair of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Singapore Arbitration Group.
"We see ourselves as a gateway between the east and west," she said.
There is a strong interest from the legal profession in making Singapore an effective arbitration centre for the region and to be the Asian equivalent of arbitration centres in London and Geneva.
"The government, arbitration practitioners like myself and the courts all sing the same tune," she said.
The ICC, the world's largest global business organisation, is responsible for the ICC International Court of Arbitration, which administers arbitrations under the ICC's rules. Since opening in Singapore two years ago, the number of cases heard there "far outstrips" many of the other ICC locations, Menon said.
Singapore is also home to several other top international arbitration institutions, including the Permanent Court of Arbitration, World Intellectual Property Organisation Arbitration and Mediation Center and the American Arbitration Association – International Centre for Dispute Resolution.
Maxwell 42's Johnston expects Singapore to continue to grow as an arbitration destination, particularly on the back of China's Belt and Road Initiative, a global development strategy to better connect China with other markets via transport and trade infrastructure.
He expects "a lot of litigation and dispute work" to come from the project and that Singapore will pick up much of the work that might have otherwise gone to Hong Kong – the other major Asian arbitration destination – because of perceptions about its neutrality.
|Related Reading:
Does Hong Kong Have What It Takes to Be Asia's Arbitration Hub?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGibson Dunn, GBS Advise in Colombia's $20 Billion Sunken Treasure Dispute
3 minute readMalaysia Courts Global Law Firms with Economic Zone and Arbitration Reforms
5 minute readWomble Bond Makes Big Play for International Disputes Work
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250