The respondents to an arbitration applied to court under s 10 of the International Arbitration Act 1994 for a determination that the arbitral tribunal had no jurisdiction. The parties in the arbitration were as follows:
(a) the first respondent was the Contractor under a construction contract ("the Contract");
(b) the second respondent was the Contractor's parent company which had guaranteed the Contractor's performance of the Contract; and
(c) the claimant was the Employer under the Contract.
The respondents contended that the tribunal had no jurisdiction because a procedure for amicable settlement prescribed in Sub-Clause 20.5 of the Contract had not been complied with. The tribunal ruled, as a preliminary question, that it had jurisdiction (the "Ruling"). The respondents applied to court for a determination to the contrary, but we agreed with the tribunal that it had jurisdiction. These are our grounds of decision.
Singapore International Arbitration Centre, SIAC, Arbitration tribunal comprising Professor Douglas Jones AO (presiding), Mr David Brynmor Thomas KC, and Mr Christopher Lau SC.