Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 AUGUST 2019

Neither Too Little, Nor Too Late: A Delayed Jurisdictional Challenge Finds Success

McCarthy Tétrault
McCarthy Tétrault
Contributor
McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault

Built on a unique model of collaboration, innovation and efficiency, McCarthy Tétrault delivers...

View firm profile
Explore more from McCarthy Tétrault

Article 16 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (the "Model Law") provides a means for early resolution of disputes over the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Introduction

Article 16 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (the "Model Law") provides a means for early resolution of disputes over the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal. Pursuant to Article 16(3), if a preliminary ruling is made by the tribunal on the issue of jurisdiction, the respondent has 30 days to appeal against the ruling to the supervisory court. This begs the question, if a respondent fails to appeal in time and chooses not to participate in the arbitral proceedings, are they precluded from using a jurisdictional challenge to set aside the final award?

In the May 9, 2019 decision of Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v. Avant Garde Maritime Services (Pte) Ltd 2019] SGCA 33 ("RALL v. AGMS"), the Singapore Court of Appeal provided an answer and held that the preclusive effect of Article 16(3) of the Model Law does not extend to a respondent who does not participate in the arbitral proceedings and has not contributed to any wastage

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from