DKB v DKC
Key facts
| Court | Singapore International Commercial Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Thomas Bathurst |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | A.Ang, Seah & Hoe, Allen & Gledhill LLP, Ang Cheng Ann Alfonso, Chong Yee Leong, James Ch'ng Chin Leong, KarLuis Quek, Lee Wei Cong Terence, Liew Pei Jun Annette |
Source: [2025] SGHC(I) 21, Singapore International Commercial Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (8)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHC(I) 21 is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision dated 4 August 2025 concerning Civil Procedure, specifically addressing costs. The judgment was delivered by Thomas Bathurst. The case was brought by DKB (claimant) against DKC (defendant). Legal representation was provided by A.Ang, Seah & Hoe and Allen & Gledhill LLP. The judgment cites 8 cases and references 2 statutory provisions, including the Arbitration Act and the International Arbitration Act.
[2025] SGHC(I) 21 explained
DKB v DKC ([2025] SGHC(I) 21) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Singapore International Commercial Court on 4 August 2025. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. 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 [2025] SGHC(I) 21 about?
DKB v DKC ([2025] SGHC(I) 21) is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Costs — Principles — Defendant successfully obtained stay of proceedings in favour of arbitration despite having no intention to commence arbitration — Whether defendant is entitled to costs”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHC(I) 21 consider?
The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A), and International Arbitration Act (Cap 10). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGHC(I) 21 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2025] SGHC(I) 14 and [2025] SGHC(I) 11. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
This SICC judgment addressed costs arising from DKC's ultimately unsuccessful stay of enforcement of a US$315.9 million arbitral award, where DKC obtained the stay but never commenced the required Stockholm arbitration. The court ordered the claimant to pay the defendant's costs of SUM 46 at $25,820, while the defendant was ordered to pay the claimant's costs of SUM 17 and SUM 18 at $70,000 plus disbursements, with no further costs order for the costs proceedings themselves.
What was decided in [2025] SGHC(I) 21?
[2025] SGHC(I) 21 (DKB v DKC) is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision from 4 August 2025 addressing Civil Procedure, specifically costs. The judgment was delivered by Thomas Bathurst.
Who were the parties in DKB v DKC ([2025] SGHC(I) 21)?
The claimant in [2025] SGHC(I) 21 was DKB, and the defendant was DKC. Legal representation included Allen & Gledhill LLP and A.Ang, Seah & Hoe. The case was decided on 4 August 2025 in the Singapore International Commercial Court.
Which judge decided [2025] SGHC(I) 21?
[2025] SGHC(I) 21 was delivered by Thomas Bathurst in the Singapore International Commercial Court on 4 August 2025. The case concerned Civil Procedure.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC(I) 21 cite?
[2025] SGHC(I) 21 cites 8 prior decisions. It references Arbitration Act, International Arbitration Act.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (8)
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 ([2025] SGHC(I) 21)