[2025] SGHC(I) 27 — HULLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 2 Ors v THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Judgments and orders Arbitration — Enforcement — Foreign award Arbitration — Award — Setting aside — Orders 21 rules 3, 20 and 21 of the SICC Rules — Whether decision was one made on the trial or the hearing on the merits of the proceedings or one made in an application in proceedings

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Arbitration

Judges (3)

Andre Maniam Coram Anthony Meagher Delivered James Allsop Coram

Counsel (11)

Providence Law Asia LLC Firm WongPartnership LLP Firm Axl Rizqy Counsel Defendant Jill Ann Koh Ying (Xu Ying) Counsel Claimant Kyle Chong Kee Cheng Counsel Defendant Lau Hui Ming Kenny Counsel Defendant Lin Weiqi Wendy Counsel Claimant Soh Kheng Yau Andre Counsel Claimant Vergis S Abraham Counsel Defendant Wee Jong Xuan Counsel Claimant Zhan Xiangyun Counsel Claimant

Parties (4)

Hulley Enterprises Ltd Claimant The Russian Federation Defendant Veteran Petroleum Ltd Claimant Yukos Universal Ltd Claimant

Summary

The Russian Federation sought permission to appeal the SICC's earlier decision rejecting its sovereign immunity defence in enforcement proceedings for the Yukos arbitral awards. The SICC clarified that its earlier decision did not constitute an appealable order since it only disposed of two of three prayers in the setting-aside application, and dismissed the permission application while granting the Russian Federation 28 days to appeal against the substantive orders dismissing its immunity defence.

Statutes Cited

Arbitration Act (Cap 10)

International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A)

State Immunity Act

s 3(1)

Cases Cited (7)

SG (5)

[1997] SGCA 39 [2024] SGCA 41 [2024] SGHC(A) 7 [2024] SGHC(I) 9 [2025] SGHC(I) 19

SLR (2)

[2022] 1 SLR 845 [2024] 1 SLR 56

Cited By (1)

[2025] SGHC 254

JEFF LIM WAI KIT v ARUMUGAM ALAMUTHU