Arbitral Digest

Matter

DTH and another v DTF and others — Singapore International Commercial Court [2026] SGHC(I) 5

Seat
Singapore
Applicable rules
Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules (6th edition, 1 August 2016)
  1. 1 December 2025Singapore

    1 December 2025Singapore

    Judgment in DPT v DPV [2025] SGHC(I) 29

    Singapore International Commercial Court

    Decision summary
    The court dismissed the application to set aside the Partial Award.

    3 months and 30 days later · 120 days

  2. 31 March 2026Singapore

    31 March 2026Singapore

    Judgment of the Singapore International Commercial Court in the case Originating Application No 23 of 2025 dated 31 March 2026

    Singapore International Commercial Court

    Decision summary
    The court dismissed OA 23 in its entirety. It held that the Costs Award’s refusal to award third-party funding costs neither conflicted with Singapore public policy under Article 34(2)(b)(ii) of the Model Law nor resulted from a departure from the parties’ agreed arbitral procedure under Article 34(2)(a)(iv), and therefore neither set aside nor remitted the Costs Award.

    Supporting details

    29 authorities · 9 participants
    DTH
    Representative
    Calvin Liang (For: DTH · DTI)
    DTI
    Representative
    Calvin Liang (For: DTH · DTI)
    DTF
    DTG
    DTJ
    Singapore International Commercial Court

    Authorities cited

    29
    • UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985, amended 2006)
      treaty/model law
    • International Arbitration Act 1994 (2020 Rev Ed)
      statute
    • Companies Act 1967
      statute
    • Civil Law Act 1909 (Cap 43, 1999 Rev Ed)
      statute
    • Civil Law (Amendment) Act 2017 (Act 2 of 2017)
      statute
    • Civil Law (Third-Party Funding) Regulations 2017, as amended by the Civil Law (Third-Party Funding) (Amendment) Regulations 2021
      regulations
    • Singapore International Arbitration Centre Rules (SIAC Rules (6th edition, 1 August 2016))
      rules
    • SIAC Practice Note 01/17 (Practice Note 01/17)
      practice note
    • Singapore International Commercial Court Rules 2021 (SICC Rules 2021)
      rules
    • Rules of Court (2014 Rev Ed)
      rules
    • Re Vanguard Energy Pte Ltd [2015] 4 SLR 597
      case
    • BNX v BOE [2017] SGHC 289
      case
    • PT Asuransi Jasa Indonesia (Persero) v Dexia Bank SA [2007] 1 SLR(R) 597
      case
    • DNZ v DOA [2026] SGHC(I) 1
      case
    • Maryani Sadeli v Arjun Permanand Samtani [2015] 1 SLR 496
      case
    • Senda International v Kiri Industries Ltd [2023] 1 SLR 96
      case
    • Lao Holdings NV v Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2023] 4 SLR 77
      case
    • Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2023] 1 SLR 55
      case
    • VV v VW [2008] 2 SLR(R) 929
      case
    • G v N [2023] HKCFI 3366
      case
    • AJU v AJT [2011] 4 SLR 739
      case
    • CEF v CEH [2021] SGHC 114
      case
    • CEF v CEH [2022] 2 SLR 918
      case
    • PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK v CRW Joint Operation [2010] 4 SLR 672
      case
    • CRW Joint Operation v PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK [2011] 4 SLR 305
      case
    • Sanum Investments Ltd v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic [2022] 4 SLR 198
      case
    • AMZ v A XX [2016] 1 SLR 549
      case
    • Then Khek Koon v Arjun Permanand Samtani [2013] SGHC 213
      case
    • Second Reading of the Civil (Amendment) Bill (Civil (Amendment) Bill No 38/2016)
      parliamentary material
  3. Date not availableSingapore

    Date not availableSingapore

    Final Award on Costs

    Decision summary
    The Tribunal awarded the Applicants US$4,129,633.56 for legal costs, including the costs of the arbitration, together with interest, and dismissed their claims for third-party funding costs and the conditional-fee uplift.

    Supporting details

    5 participants
    DTH
    DTI
    DTF
    DTG
    DTJ
  4. Date not availableSingapore

    Date not availableSingapore

    Partial Award

    Decision summary
    The Tribunal found breaches of the parties’ agreements and oppressive conduct, held the purported termination of the agreements and the share issuance that diluted the Applicants’ interest invalid, and ordered DTF to buy the Applicants’ shares in the joint venture vehicle for US$14,736,000.

    Supporting details

    5 participants
    DTH
    DTI
    DTF
    DTG
    DTJ

Matter record

Report a correction

DTH and another v DTF and others — Singapore International Commercial Court [2026] SGHC(I) 5 · Matter