+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
Cornerstone Seminars
FIDIC
Knowledge Hub
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk

PERSERO 2 – Singapore Court of Appeal rules DAB decisions are enforceable by way of interim award

On 27 May 2015, the 160-page reserved judgement of the Singapore Court of Appeal (“CA”) was handed down in Persero 2 - PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) TBK (“PGN”) v CRW Joint Operation (“CRW”)[1]. It will be regarded a triumph for contractors wishing to enforce DAB decisions. The CA ruled that the interim award issued by the arbitral tribunal ordering enforcement of the DAB’s decision should stand. Using the concept of an “inherent premise”, the CA made two important findings: 1) it was not necessary for the Contractor to refer the failure to pay (the secondary dispute) back to the DAB; and 2) it was not necessary for him to refer the merits (the primary dispute) in the same single arbitration as his application to enforce.

By |September 14th, 2015|Dispute Boards, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on PERSERO 2 – Singapore Court of Appeal rules DAB decisions are enforceable by way of interim award

Mind The Gap: Analysis of Cases and Principles Concerning the Ability of ICC Arbitral Tribunals to Enforce Binding DAB Decisions Under the 1999 FIDIC Conditions of Contract

Read the full article here.

By |January 1st, 2014|Arbitration, Dispute Boards, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Mind The Gap: Analysis of Cases and Principles Concerning the Ability of ICC Arbitral Tribunals to Enforce Binding DAB Decisions Under the 1999 FIDIC Conditions of Contract

Enforcement of DAB decisions – The legal justification for the ‘enforcement’ of a ‘binding’ DAB decision under the FIDIC 1999 Red Book

Read the full article here.

By |March 1st, 2012|Dispute Boards, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Enforcement of DAB decisions – The legal justification for the ‘enforcement’ of a ‘binding’ DAB decision under the FIDIC 1999 Red Book
Go to Top