← All Authorities
Singapore Leading Case challenges to awards

AJU v AJT

[2011] 4 SLR 739
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2011
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A court may set aside an arbitral award procured by fraud even where the fraud was argued before the tribunal during arbitration proceedings.

Key Principle

setting aside for fraud; the court will set aside awards procured by fraud even when fraud was argued before the tribunal

Area of Law

Arbitration

Related Cases

TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v Judges of the Federal Court of Australia (2013) 251 CLR 533

Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) is constitutionally valid and grounds for refusal are strictly limited.

Astro Nusantara International BV v PT Ayunda Prima Mitra [2018] HKCFI 2168

HK court considered enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the New York Convention, addressing grounds for refusal of enforcement.

Pacific China Holdings Ltd v Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd (2012) 15 HKCFAR 296

CFA affirmed a pro-enforcement approach to arbitration clauses under the Arbitration Ordinance, requiring courts to give effect to arbitration agreements broadly.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of AJU v AJT and how it applies to your situation.

Explain AJU v AJT