DYX v DYY
Featured in the weekly digest — week of 14–20 September 2026 →
Key facts
| Court | Singapore International Commercial Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | James Michael Peck |
| Charges / claim | Arbitration, Insolvency Law |
| Counsel | Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP, Drew & Napier LLC, Chan Wei Meng, Goh Sher Hwyn Rebecca, Kuan Jin Yin, Lim Hui Li Debby, Lim Mingguan, Nguyen Minh Tri, Zeng Yu |
Source: [2026] SGHC(I) 19, Singapore International Commercial Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (9)
Parties (3)
Case Significance
DYX v DYY and another matter [2026] SGHC(I) 19 was decided in the Singapore International Commercial Court by James Michael Peck IJ, with grounds of decision dated 17 September 2026. The Claimant, DYX, a Cayman Islands fund, applied in SIC/OA 1/2026 and SIC/OA 2/2026 for judicial managers to be appointed over DYY and its wholly-owned subsidiary DYZ, based on loans advanced in 2020 and 2022. The Respondents sought a stay, relying on a Waiver and Release Deed dated 16 January 2025 containing an arbitration clause. The issue was whether the Claimant, not named in that deed, was bound by it. The court applied the prima facie standard, granted the stay under s 6 of the International Arbitration Act and referred the disputes to the SIAC.
[2026] SGHC(I) 19 explained
DYX v DYY ([2026] SGHC(I) 19) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Singapore International Commercial Court on 17 September 2026. It is categorised under Arbitration and Insolvency Law. 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 [2026] SGHC(I) 19 about?
DYX v DYY ([2026] SGHC(I) 19) is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Arbitration — Stay of court proceedings — Grounds” and “Insolvency Law — Judicial management — Stay of proceedings in favour of arbitration”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC(I) 19 consider?
The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, 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 earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGHC(I) 19 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGCA 31. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
What was DYX v DYY [2026] SGHC(I) 19 about?
DYX sought judicial managers for DYY and DYZ over loans advanced in 2020 and 2022. The Respondents sought a stay in favour of arbitration, relying on a Waiver and Release Deed dated 16 January 2025 containing an arbitration clause.
Did the court stay the judicial management applications in [2026] SGHC(I) 19?
Yes. James Michael Peck IJ held the prima facie standard was met, stayed OA 1 and OA 2 under s 6 of the International Arbitration Act and referred disputes about the Waiver Deed and the Loans to the SIAC.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (12)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC(I) 19)