DWE v DWF
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
In DWE v DWF [2026] SGHC 106, Justice Kristy Tan of the High Court General Division dismissed an application by DWE — a loyalty and rewards management company — to set aside part of an arbitral award dated 4 October 2025 under s 24(b) of the International Arbitration Act 1994. DWE contended that the sole arbitrator breached the fair hearing rule in the portion of the award it challenged. The underlying dispute arose from a co-branded prepaid card program collaboration agreement of 28 December 2018 between DWE and DWF, a payments technology company.
Summary
DWE, a loyalty and rewards management company, applied to set aside part of an arbitral award under s 24(b) of the International Arbitration Act 1994, alleging the sole arbitrator breached the fair hearing rule in a dispute arising from a co-branded prepaid card collaboration agreement with DWF involving a US$2,007,000 sign-on bonus and associated clawback provisions. The court found that the tribunal had not breached natural justice and that DWE's six grounds amounted to an impermissible challenge to the merits of the award. The application was dismissed.
What was the outcome of DWE's application to set aside the arbitral award in DWE v DWF [2026] SGHC 106?
Justice Kristy Tan dismissed DWE's application to set aside part of the 4 October 2025 arbitral award. DWE argued the sole arbitrator breached the fair hearing rule, but the High Court found no grounds under s 24(b) of the International Arbitration Act 1994 to disturb that portion of the award.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (6)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 106)