DBL v DBM
Outcome
Appeal dismissedWe therefore dismissed the appeal, and fixed costs in favour of the respondent in the aggregate sum of $60,000. Sundaresh Menon Chief JusticeSteven Chong Justice of the Court of AppealJudith Prakash Senior JudgePrakash Pillai, Koh Junxiang and Wang Chunhua (Clasis LLC) for the appellant;Chan Cong Yen Lionel, Caleb Tan Jia Chween and Kirsten Siow (Oon & Bazul LLP) for the respondent.
Source: [2024] SGCA 19, Court of Appeal, decided 21 May 2024. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Judith Prakash, Steven Chong, Sundaresh Menon |
| Charges / claim | Arbitration |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Sentence / award | $60,000 |
| Counsel | Clasis LLC, Oon & Bazul LLP, Caleb Tan Jia Chween, Chan Cong Yen Lionel, Kirsten Siow, Koh Junxiang, Prakash Pillai, Wang Chunhua |
Source: [2024] SGCA 19, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (8)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
DBL v DBM [2024] SGCA 19 was decided by the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 21 May 2024 in Civil Appeal No 27 of 2023, with Sundaresh Menon CJ delivering the grounds of decision of the court, sitting with Steven Chong JCA and Judith Prakash SJ, after a hearing on 28 March 2024. The appeal was against the decision of the High Court judge in DBL v DBM [2023] SGHC 267, in which the appellant had unsuccessfully sought to set aside an arbitral award on the basis that it was tainted by a breach of natural justice. The appellant relied on two principal grounds: first, that the tribunal allowed a "Searoutes Demonstration" conducted by the respondent's counsel during oral closing submissions contrary to the agreed hearing protocol, and that the appellant was not afforded a reasonable and fair opportunity to respond; and second, that the tribunal failed altogether to consider two defences the appellant had raised. The Court of Appeal heard and dismissed the appeal.
[2024] SGCA 19 explained
DBL v DBM ([2024] SGCA 19) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 21 May 2024. It is categorised under Arbitration. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2024] SGCA 19 about?
DBL v DBM ([2024] SGCA 19) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside — Rules of natural justice”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 19 consider?
The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B), International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A), and International Arbitration Act (Cap 10), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What was DBL v DBM [2024] SGCA 19 about?
Decided on 21 May 2024 by the Court of Appeal, DBL v DBM was an appeal against the refusal to set aside an arbitral award for breach of natural justice. The appellant challenged a "Searoutes Demonstration" by the respondent's counsel and alleged two defences were not considered.
Which judges decided DBL v DBM [2024] SGCA 19?
The Court of Appeal comprised Sundaresh Menon CJ, Steven Chong JCA and Judith Prakash SJ. Sundaresh Menon CJ delivered the grounds of decision of the court, which dismissed the appeal from DBL v DBM [2023] SGHC 267 after a hearing on 28 March 2024.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (9)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 19)