Institutional arbitration meaning

CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) This Checklist is archived and no longer being actively maintained. Numerous arbitral organisations have responded to the coronavirus pandemic by issuing practical guidance and/or making adjustments to their standard procedures and working practices. For further details on how this material and associated arbitration proceedings could be affected, see Practice Note: Arbitral organisations and coronavirus (COVID-19)—practical impact [Archived] [Archived] [Archived]. For additional information, see: Coronavirus (COVID-19) and arbitration—overview. For direct links to guidance on the 2021 ICC Rules (effective 1 January 2021) and the 2012 ICC Rules, see: ICC arbitration—overview...

ARCHIVED This Flowchart is archived and is no longer maintained. FORTHCOMING CHANGE On 11 August 2020, the LCIA released the 2020 edition of its Arbitration Rules, which take effect on 1 October 2020 (the LCIA Rules 2020). These apply to all arbitrations begun on and after that date. A new set of Practice Notes for the LCIA Rules 2020 is in preparation...

Before commencing the arbitration Check limits; confirm SIAC clause; interim relief; tribunal size; proper nominations. Emergency measures Seek Emergency Arbitrator pre-constitution; urgent, Registrar-approved, binding relief. Expedited Procedure Apply pre-constitution; expect sole arbitrator, streamlined process, six‑month award. Commencing the arbitration Serve Notice on Registrar/respondent with required particulars, funding statement, fee. Responding to the arbitration Respond within 14 days; address claims, jurisdiction and counterclaims. Jurisdiction Arbitration proceeds unless screened; tribunal rules; object under Rule 31. Preliminary meeting and directions Attend administrative calls; hold early case management conference. Written statements File Claim, Defence, Counterclaim as directed; state facts, grounds, relief. Evidence Tribunal controls evidence; written testimony allowed; oral examination on request. The hearing Any party may...

This flowchart supports a tenant’s bid to extend a lease under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993). It explains the procedure beginning with service of the tenant’s section 42 notice, then the landlord’s section 45 counter-notice, and the time limits for issuing applications to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) (or, in Wales, the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT)), and/or to the County Court where required. Note 1 See Practice Note: Guide to lease extensions of flats under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993—Preparation for securing a lease extension...

ARCHIVED This flowchart is archived and no longer receives any maintenance...

DMZ v DNA [2025] SGHC 31 What are the practical implications of this case? Administrative acts by arbitral bodies can be susceptible to review where neither the institution’s rules, the lex arbitri, nor the arbitration agreement expressly or implicitly bar it. Such decisions must be taken lawfully, with respect for procedural fairness, the institution’s own rules, the applicable lex arbitri and the contractual terms governing the arbitration. Where an institution issues an administrative ruling that carries no right of appeal or review, a party aggrieved by that outcome ought to invite the institution to revisit its position under an express, or an implied, power to reconsider (paras [40]–[45]). Any court challenge is unlikely to succeed if the unhappy party failed first to request reconsideration by the institution. Instead of mounting a direct challenge where the rules foreclose one, parties may allow the decision to remain in place and seek measures to neutralise its consequences. Here, the court determined that the sole permissible route to contest the decision was to...

DMZ v DNA [2025] SGCA 52 What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment clarifies what “matters” means in Article 5 of the Model Law, which is incorporated into Singapore law by section 3 of the International Arbitration Act 1994 (IAA). Article 5 provides: “In matters governed by the Model Law, no court shall intervene except where so provided in the Model Law.” The effect is that Singapore courts lack authority, under Article 5, to intrude upon procedural decisions of an arbitral institution that do not impede the progress or conduct of an arbitration. Although a registrar (or equivalent position) of an arbitral institution is not a member of the tribunal tasked with resolving the parties’ substantive dispute, that point concerns only the consequence of the procedural step. Where parties have adopted institutional rules in their arbitration agreement, and those rules allocate specified decisions to a designated decision-maker, that allocation is part of the parties’ bargain about the conduct of the arbitration and forms a stage...

In this issue: Arbitration in England & Wales International Arbitration Sector-and industry-specific arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Arbitration in England & Wales Arbitration Bill receives Royal Assent, strengthening England and Wales as an arbitration hub The Arbitration Bill secured Royal Assent from His Majesty the King on 24 February 2025, and now takes effect as the Arbitration Act 2025. This targeted refinement of the Arbitration Act 1996 further consolidates London’s standing as a premier arbitration seat. See News Analysis: Arbitration Bill receives Royal Assent, strengthening England and Wales as an arbitration hub and LNB News 25/02/2025 7. Court of Appeal—final anti-suit injunction varied to avoid Russian court penalty In UniCredit v RusChemAlliance [2025] EWCA Civ 99, the Court of Appeal modified a final anti-suit injunction, removing the injunctive relief while keeping a declaration that...

This Practice Note examines the powers of the arbitral tribunal under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules (the UNCITRAL Rules). For an introduction to the UNCITRAL Rules, see Practice Note: UNCITRAL Rules—background and introduction. For guidance on appointing the tribunal, see Practice Note: UNCITRAL Rules—appointment of the arbitral tribunal. A core feature of the UNCITRAL arbitration framework is the authority vested in the tribunal. The UNCITRAL Rules grant the arbitral tribunal extensive powers over the management and timetable of the proceedings, evidence, the making of awards, interim measures and the allocation of costs. General power of the arbitral tribunal The tribunal may conduct the proceedings in such manner as it deems appropriate, provided it treats the parties equally and affords each party a reasonable opportunity to present its case (UNCITRAL Rules, Article 17(1)). The broad discretion conferred on the tribunal is a fundamental tenet of UNCITRAL arbitration and is derived from the original 1976 UNCITRAL Rules...

This Practice Note sets out guidance on arbitral awards in proceedings under the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Administered Arbitration Rules 2018 (2018 HKIAC Rules; HKIAC 2018). As explained in Practice Note: HKIAC (2018)—the HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules—application and key features, the 2018 HKIAC Rules generally govern HKIAC arbitrations commenced on or after 1 November 2018, save where the parties agree otherwise; for HKIAC arbitrations begun before 1 November 2018, the 2013 HKIAC Rules will generally apply unless the parties agreed otherwise. For an overview of the HKIAC and how it is organised, see Practice Note: HKIAC—background to and structure of the institution. Awards in HKIAC arbitrations In line with most institutional regimes, under the 2018 HKIAC Rules a tribunal may render interim, interlocutory, or partial awards and, in addition to a final award, may issue interim awards as to costs (HKIAC 2018, art 35.1). Where the tribunal has more than one arbitrator, any award or other ruling is to be made by a majority. Failing a...

The Swiss Rules of International Arbitration, updated on 1 June 2021 (the Swiss Rules), apply—unless the parties agree otherwise—to any arbitration begun on or after 1 June 2021 under an arbitration agreement referring either to the Swiss Rules or to the prior rules of chambers or organisations that joined the Swiss Rules or brought their proceedings within them. This Practice Note examines the appointment of the arbitral tribunal under the Swiss Rules. The provisions regulating constitution of the tribunal are, for the most part, consistent with those in most other widely used arbitration rules, though there are a handful of particularities. For guidance on the 2012 Swiss Rules, see: Swiss Rules arbitration—overview. This note highlights similarities and specific features when constituting tribunals, within the context of these Swiss Rules and notes areas of difference. Number of arbitrators Under the Swiss Rules, the parties may decide the size of the arbitral tribunal, either within their arbitration clause or subsequently. While that choice rests with the parties, the Arbitration Court...

To: Singapore International Arbitration Centre28 Maxwell Road, 03–01 Maxwell Chambers SuitesBY [ SPECIFY MODE OF DELIVERY ]Singapore 069115 Attn: The Registrar With copy, including all attachments, to: [ Insert name and address of all Respondents ]BY [ SPECIFY MODE OF DELIVERY ] Dear [ Registrar of SIAC ], We enclose a Notice of Arbitration, now lodged with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) in accordance with rule 3 of the SIAC Rules of Arbitration, 6th Edition, 2016 (SIAC Rules). A copy is being served on the Respondent(s) by the service method(s) indicated above. The service date is [ insert anticipated date of delivery ]. [ Pursuant to rule 3.1(k) of the SIAC Rules, we attach a local cheque for [ insert amount ], payable to the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, covering the required filing fee. OR Pursuant to rule 3.1(k) of the SIAC Rules, the sum of [ insert amount ], being the requisite filing fees, was remitted on [ insert date ]...

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Parties WEIPA RESOURCES LIMITED — Claimant SELANGOR RESOURCES SDN BHD — Respondent APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS Orders sought This is the Respondent’s application seeking the following directions: That the Claimant furnish security for the Respondent’s costs of these arbitration proceedings in the amount of [ insert amount ]; That the Claimant supply such security to the Respondent by way of [ insert details of the form in which security is sought, eg banker’s draft/bank guarantee/solicitor’s undertaking ]; That these arbitration proceedings, together with all procedural and administrative deadlines therein, be stayed until the security has been provided; and That, should the Respondent fail to provide the security in accordance with subparagraph (1.2) above by [ insert date ], then [ set out consequences ]. The principal bases advanced for this application are: The Claimant possesses insufficient assets...

ARCHIVED : This Precedent is archived and no longer actively maintained. It is intended for use in relation to arbitrations conducted under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre 2013 (5th edition) (2013 SIAC Rules). These 2013 SIAC Rules govern any arbitration begun on or after 1 April 2013, unless the parties have agreed a different position...