New Rules, Same Robustness - Singapore International Arbitration Centre’s Latest Rules
Dispute Resolution / SIAC
Khushboo ShahdadpuriPartner, Dispute Resolution
Alia KoudsiAssociate, Dispute Resolution
The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) has introduced the latest and seventh edition of its arbitration rules (“SIAC Rules 2025”) which, unless agreed by the parties, apply to all arbitrations commenced on or after 1 January 2025.
We provide a commentary on the prominent provisions of the SIAC Rules 2025 and practical implications for parties facing an arbitration under the SIAC Rules 2025.
In addition to codifying the arbitral tribunal’s powers to make a final and binding preliminary determination of any issue, the SIAC has also refined its emergency interim relief provisions. The parties are now allowed under the SIAC Rules 2025 to seek protective preliminary orders from an Emergency Arbitrator, without notification to the other party as ex parte orders. Closer to the region, this is similar to the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (“DIAC”) Rules 2022, which allow for the submission of an emergency interim relief concurrently with the filing of a request for arbitration without sending a copy of the application to all other parties if it reasonably believes that such notice may jeopardise the efficacy of the application for emergency interim relief.
The SIAC has also introduced enhancements to the Emergency Arbitrator provisions. An application for an Emergency Arbitrator can now be filed prior to the filing of the Notice of Arbitration, while the previous rules of 2016 (“SIAC Rules 2016”) allowed Emergency Arbitrator applications to be filed only in concurrence with or following the filing of the Notice of Arbitration. This is a key change from other arbitral rules such as DIAC Rules 2022.
In the SIAC Rules 2025, the parties’ window to challenge the appointment of the Emergency Arbitrator has also been reduced to 24 hours from receipt of the notice of appointment, or from the date that the circumstances giving rise to the challenge become known or should have reasonably been known to that party.
In contrast, the SIAC Rules 2016 stipulate that any challenge to the appointment of the Emergency Arbitrator was to be made within two days from the Registrar’s communication of the appointment of the Emergency Arbitrator and the circumstances disclosed.
While, the preliminary order application requirements under the SIAC Rules 2016 were limited to the nature, and reasons for the relief, in addition to proof of notification to all other parties, in the SIAC Rules 2025, there is now a more formalised and longer list of requirements which mainly accommodates the possibility of making such an application before the Notice of Arbitration, and even requires the disclosure of third-party funding.
If the application for the appointment of Emergency Arbitrator is accepted by the president of the SIAC Court (“President”), in the SIAC Rules 2025, the appointment of the Emergency Arbitrator is to take place within 24 hours from the later date of: (a) the date of receipt of the application by the Registrar; or (b) the date of receipt of payment of the Emergency Arbitrator filing fee and deposits.
The timing of when the Emergency Arbitrator’s order or award is to be issued has not changed between the SIAC Rules 2016 and the SIAC Rules 2025; it is still to be issued within 14 days from the date of the Emergency Arbitrator’s appointment, unless the time is extended by the Registrar.
The applicant is required to promptly transmit any preliminary order by the Emergency Arbitrator once made to any counterparties within 12 hours of the order, failing which the protective preliminary order shall expire 3 days after the date on which it was issued.
Unlike the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) Arbitration Rules and the DIAC Rules, the SIAC Rules 2025 have introduced an express prohibition on any party or its representative to engage in “any ex parte communications relating to the arbitration with any prospective arbitrator, including any candidate for appointment as a party-nominated arbitrator”
The SIAC has also introduced a new provision known as the streamlined procedure where the value of the dispute (i.e., the aggregate of any claim, counterclaim, cross-claim or set-off) does not exceed SGD 1 million (or approximately USD 740,000). The streamlined procedure, distinct from the expedited procedure which continued from the SIAC Rules 2016, applies now where the amount in dispute exceeds the equivalent amount of SGD 1 million (or approximately USD 740,000) but does not exceed the equivalent amount of SGD 10 million (or approximately USD 7,400,000), an increase from the previous SGD 6 million (or approximately USD 4,44,600) threshold in the SIAC Rules 2016.
Should the parties intend to depart from the streamlined procedure, if the dispute value is under SGD 1 million (or approximately USD 740,000), this should either be done in writing by mutual agreement14 or challenged by one of the parties after the constitution of the arbitral tribunal by applying to the President for their nonapplication.
There are streamlined timeframes for certain stages and avenues of the arbitration process as follows:
Appointment and challenge of the sole arbitrator: The default position is that all streamlined procedure entails the appointment of a sole arbitrator, which the parties should jointly agree to within 3 days from the date of the notification of the streamlined procedure to the parties. Alternatively, at a party’s request at any time or after this timeframe expires, the President will appoint the sole arbitrator “as soon as practicable”. It is notable that the SIAC Rules 2025, do not provide a timeframe for the sole arbitrator’s appointment by the President. Additionally, a party who wishes to challenge the appointment of an arbitrator is required to do so within a short span of 3 days from the date of receipt of the notice of appointment, or from the date any grounds for a challenge become known or “should have reasonably been known to that party.”
Conduct of the Streamlined Proceedings: The arbitral tribunal is to hold an initial case management conference within 5 days from the date of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. Notably, the arbitral tribunal may set a time limit for the parties to file any interlocutory applications without leave from the arbitral tribunal. The proceedings will be with written submissions and accompanying documentary evidence, with the exclusion of a production process, fact or expert witness evidence, or hearing unless the arbitral tribunal decides otherwise.
Timeline for Award: The timeline for the issuance of awards in the streamlined procedure can be extendable. While the SIAC Rules 2025 stipulate that the final award is to be issued within 3 months from the date of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, it is qualified by “unless the Registrar extends the time for making such final award”.
As mentioned above, the expedited procedure will apply where the amount in dispute exceeds SGD 1 million (or approximately USD 740,000) but not USD 10 million (or approximately USD 7,400,000). In addition, expedited procedure can also apply where although the dispute value does not exceed the equivalent amount of SGD 1 million (or approximately USD 740,000), the President has determined that the streamlined procedure shall not apply to the arbitration or where the circumstances of the case warrant the application of the expedited procedure.
The expedited procedure provides a slightly different approach to the streamlined procedure with the following features:
Similar to the streamlined procedure, a sole arbitrator is appointed by default, unless the President decides otherwise.
Disputes are decided based on written submissions and accompanying documentary evidence. However, unlike the streamlined procedure, a party, can request a hearing. Furthermore, document production and witness evidence are part of the procedure, with the arbitral tribunal having the option to apply limitations and restrictions to them and to the written submissions. Most importantly, the expedited procedure offers a longer timeline for the issuance of an award within 6 months from the date of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, unless the Registrar’s scrutiny extends this time.
The SIAC Rules 2025 have expanded the powers of the Registrar by allowing the Registrar to accept and order any procedural applications. Furthermore, the Registrar now has the power to conduct administrative conferences at its own discretion with the parties to discuss procedural or administrative directions, prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. The SIAC Rules 2025, however, do not provide any guidance on the type of procedural and administrative directions the Registrar may issue prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. Rules 43.1 and 11 suggest that the Registrar may also “suspend an arbitration in accordance with such terms as the parties have agreed or as otherwise provided in these [r]ules”, prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.
The SIAC Rules 2025 have also introduced changes to the President’s powers including the following:
“If under the terms of an appointment procedure agreed by the parties, there is a substantial risk of unequal treatment that may risk affecting the validity or enforceability of the award”, the President may, “take any necessary measure to constitute an independent and impartial Tribunal.” This may include revoking the appointment of any arbitrator.
The President is now empowered to explicitly refuse to appoint any arbitrator nominated by the parties, the co-arbitrators or a third person.
Unlike the previous set of rules, under the SIAC Rules 2025, the removal of an arbitrator is a decision made by the SIAC Court instead of the President, although the President may be involved in the process.
Unlike the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) Arbitration Rules and the DIAC Rules, the SIAC Rules 2025 have introduced an express prohibition on any party or its representative to engage in “any ex parte communications relating to the arbitration with any prospective arbitrator, including any candidate for appointment as a party-nominated arbitrator”. To assist with gauging a prospective party-nominated arbitrator’s availability and ability to be appointed as arbitrator, certain exceptions are carved out of this prohibition, including:
general nature of the dispute and of the anticipated proceedings;
qualifications, availability or independence; and
the suitability of any candidate for presiding arbitrator, where it is agreed for the parties or party-nominated arbitrators to participate in the nomination of the presiding arbitrator.
Like the ICC, the DIAC and various other arbitral institutions’ rules, the SIAC now requires the disclosure of the existence of third-party funding arrangements, and the identity and contact details of the third-party funder. Any such agreement can be taken into account in apportioning costs of the arbitration. Furthermore, following the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, a party may not enter into a third-party funding agreement which may give rise to a conflict of interest with any member of the arbitral tribunal.
Other distinct features of the SIAC Rules 2025 include the following:
Allowing the Registrar to refer a jurisdiction issue to the SIAC Court of Arbitration for a prima facie determination prior to the constitution of an arbitral tribunal, where a respondent is not participating in proceedings, or if a party objects to the existence, validity or applicability of an arbitration agreement.
A provision for the appointment of an independent member to committees of the SIAC Court of Arbitration that are considering challenges to arbitrators, where the challenged arbitrator is a member of the SIAC Court of Arbitration or SIAC Board.
With an added emphasis on information security, the arbitral tribunal will now have the power to take appropriate measures, including issuing an order or award for sanctions, damages or costs, if a party does not take necessary steps to comply with the information security measures agreed by the parties or directed by an arbitral tribunal.
Pursuant to the SIAC Rules 2025, the default position requires the President to appoint a sole arbitrator or presiding arbitrator of a different nationality to the parties where the parties are of different nationalities unless the President determines it appropriate otherwise.
The procedural revisions in the SIAC Rules 2025 bring about enhanced improvement that pushes for more efficiency, promise more fairness and help to support the enforcement of the awards.
The added provisions are contemporaneously streamlined and aligned with the expectations of the arbitration community considering the extensive public consultations. The offering of new procedures should provide more expeditious proceedings while bringing time and cost savings to the parties.
For further information,please contact Khushboo Shahdadpuri and Alia Koudsi.
Published in March 2025
