• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

SIAC's New Insolvency Arbitration Protocol

On 13 December 2024, the SIAC opened a public consultation into its new SIAC Insolvency Arbitration Protocol (the “Protocol”). The Protocol is designed to provide a set of truncated procedural rules for the resolution of disputes “arising out of or in connection with, or in anticipation of, any insolvency proceedings”. Insolvency proceedings are defined widely in the Protocol and include judicial, administrative and debt restructuring proceedings where the affairs of a person or entity are subject to, or will be subject to, control or supervision by a court. The Protocol states that awards generally have to be rendered within 6 months from the date of constitution of the tribunal and sets the default seat of the arbitration as Singapore and Singapore Law as the default governing law although this can be changed by the parties. The Protocol also anticipates the creation of a specialist panel of arbitrators with expertise in insolvency related disputes, the SIAC Specialist Insolvency Disputes Panel. Given that insolvency practitioners are generally officers of the Court and have reporting duties to creditors and their supervising Court, the Protocol also allows the parties to request the tribunal to amend the default confidentiality provisions surrounding an arbitration to allow parties to inter alia disclose part or all of any award.

This Protocol is a positive development given the increasing globalisation of business and consequently of cross-border insolvencies; it provides an alternative forum for the determination of insolvency disputes which will be particularly attractive in cases which involve foreign debtors. That said parties still need to be aware that not all jurisdictions accept the arbitrability of insolvency disputes and some jurisdictions draw a distinction between private remedial claims which they recognise as arbitrable, and avoidance claims pursued in insolvency proceedings which are non-arbitrable[1]. The public consultation closes on 17 January 2025.


 

[1] Article V(2)(a) of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention) provides that the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused if “the subject matter of the difference is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the law of that country”.

Our thinking

  • Joseph Evans, Cassidy Fan and Jessica Boxford write for New Law Journal on the future of insolvency: a digital asset revolution

    Joseph Evans

    In the Press

  • Law 360 quotes Stewart Hey on the potential integration of the PSR into the FCA and the impact on APP fraud reimbursement

    Stewart Hey

    In the Press

  • Singaporean Court Declines to Revisit SIAC Registrar’s Administrative Decision

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • New "In-House Counsel Privilege" in Swiss law

    Pierre Bydzovsky

    Insights

  • Swiss Anti-Corruption Laws: A Guide to Bribery Offences, Compliance, and Penalties

    Daniela Iselin

    Insights

  • Passage of the English Arbitration Act 2025 into Law

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • Mary Bagnall writes for FMCG CEO on the recent Thatchers v Aldi court ruling

    Mary Bagnall

    In the Press

  • RTHK interviews Patrick Chan on the rise of sports arbitration in Hong Kong

    Patrick Chan

    In the Press

  • Stephen Burns and Katie Bewick write for Growth Business on the options available for appointing a new director after a company dispute

    Stephen Burns

    In the Press

  • 5 trends to watch in International Arbitration in 2025

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • Living Together in the 2020s: Why more Gen Z’s are Saying 'Yes' to Cohabitation Agreements

    Cara Fung

    Quick Reads

  • Stepping into the Director's Chair: The Landscape of Risk in Distressed Companies – Misfeasance Trading

    Jessica Boxford

    Insights

  • Justice for the Victims of Britain's Largest Ponzi Scheme?

    Caroline Greenwell

    Quick Reads

  • Moths, a mansion house and multi-million pound misrepresentations

    Katy Ackroyd

    Insights

  • The Law Society Gazette quotes Tamasin Perkins on the concerns surrounding the proposed amendment to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

    Tamasin Perkins

    In the Press

  • Mahmood v Standard Chartered Bank – A landmark decision in discrimination and victimisation but what does it mean for discrimination claims in the DIFC?

    Nick Hurley

    Insights

  • Property Patter: Challenges for commercial property in 2025

    Emma Humphreys

    Podcasts

  • An introduction to the new Procurement Act 2023

    Jamie Cartwright

    Quick Reads

  • Mind the Gap Trade Mark

    Charlotte Duly

    Insights

  • A Closer Look at the Meaning of ‘Investor’ in Investment Treaty Arbitration

    Stephen Chan

    Insights

Back to top