← All Authorities
Singapore challenges to awards

Qilin World Capital Ltd v CPIT Investments Ltd

[2018] 5 SLR 1
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore Court of Appeal
Year2018
StatusBinding authority

Summary

SGCA confirmed that jurisdictional errors of law within a tribunal's mandate are not grounds for setting aside an arbitral award.

Key Principle

The SGCA upheld an award of damages in an arbitration arising from a share lending agreement; the court confirmed that errors of law within the tribunal's jurisdiction are not grounds for setting aside.

Area of Law

arbitration

Related Cases

Rinehart v Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 514

A dispute must be referred to arbitration if it falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement, applying a generous interpretation in favour of arbitrability.

TCL Air Conditioner v Judges of the Federal Court (Arbitral Awards) [2013] HCA 5

Enforcement of international commercial arbitral awards does not involve arbitrators exercising judicial power; enforcement itself is a judicial function constitutionally vested in Chapter III courts.

Re Shift Energy Asia Limited [2025] HKCFI 6415

Court considered how the Guy Lam discretion operates where the existence of an arbitration agreement is itself in dispute.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Qilin World Capital Ltd v CPIT Investments Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Qilin World Capital Ltd v CPIT...