Power & City Conttractors Ltd v LTL Project (PVT) Ltd (HCT-09-CV-MA-0062-2011)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
Where parties have included an arbitration clause in their contract, the court retains jurisdiction to receive the suit but is mandated by s.40 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2000 to refer disputes to arbitration at the request of one party unless the arbitration agreement is null, void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. An arbitration clause is binding and not optional. A point of law may be raised at any time during civil proceedings.
Outcome
Proceedings stayed and matter referred to arbitration under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre
Facts
The applicant sued the respondent in High Court Civil Suit 29 of 2011 for breach of contract and filed Misc. Application 62 of 2011 seeking a temporary injunction. When the application came up for hearing on 15 February 2012, the applicant's counsel sought an adjournment having just received the brief. The respondent's counsel objected and raised a preliminary objection that the parties' consortium agreement contained an arbitration clause at clause 8.3.3 requiring disputes to be referred to arbitration under the Singapore International Arbitration Centre rules. The applicant argued that the arbitration clause was optional, that the respondent lacked locus to raise the objection, and that the objection was raised too late. The respondent contended that referral to arbitration was mandatory under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2000 and that the objection had been raised at the earliest opportunity in pleadings.
Issues
- Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit and application where the parties' contract contains an arbitration clause.
- Whether the respondent raised the objection to jurisdiction at the proper time and in the proper manner.
- Whether the arbitration clause in the consortium agreement is mandatory or optional.
- Whether the court should stay proceedings and refer the dispute to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Orders
- Preliminary objection upheld.
- Proceedings in Civil Suit No. 29 of 2011 stayed.
- Proceedings in Misc. Application No. 62 of 2011 stayed.
- Dispute between the parties referred to arbitration.
- Costs in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (5)
- Thompson v Charnock (1777) 8 Term Rep 139
- Tononoka Steels Ltd v Eastern and Southern Africa Trade and Development Bank [2000] 2 EA 532
- National Social Security Fund v Alcon International Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2008)
- Fulgensius Mungereza v Price Waterhouse Coopers (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2002)
- Makula International Ltd v Cardinal Nsubuga (1982) HCB 11
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.