DFM v DFL
Outcome
Appeal dismissedWe therefore dismissed the appeal with costs fixed in the aggregate sum of $31,000 with the usual order as to payment out of the security.
Source: [2024] SGCA 41, Court of Appeal, decided 17 October 2024. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Belinda Ang, Steven Chong, Sundaresh Menon |
| Charges / claim | Arbitration |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Sentence / award | $31,000 |
| Counsel | Drew & Napier LLC, Providence Law Asia LLC, Kyle Chong Kee Cheng, Lau Hui Ming Kenny, Mahesh Rai s/o Vedprakash Rai, Soon Ser Jia Clarissa, Yong Wei Jun Jonathan, Zhuo Jiaxiang |
Source: [2024] SGCA 41, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (8)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
DFM v DFL [2024] SGCA 41 was a Grounds of Decision delivered by Sundaresh Menon CJ, sitting with Steven Chong JCA and Belinda Ang JCA, in the Court of Appeal on 17 October 2024 in Civil Appeal No 6 of 2024. The respondent had obtained permission (the Leave Order, HC/ORC 53/2023) to enforce a provisional award granting interim relief issued on 16 November 2022 by an arbitral tribunal in Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) Arbitration No 60 of 2022. Through the interim relief application leading to that Provisional Award, the respondent had sought, among other orders, a freezing order against the appellant's assets up to the value of US$90,826,522. In Summons No 2625 of 2023, the appellant applied to set aside the Leave Order under s 31(2)(e) of the International Arbitration Act 1994 (2020 Rev Ed), arguing that the composition of the arbitral authority or the arbitral procedure had not been in accordance with the parties' agreement. The appeal concerned whether the respondent had waived his jurisdictional objection in the application for interim relief.
[2024] SGCA 41 explained
DFM v DFL ([2024] SGCA 41) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 17 October 2024. It is categorised under Arbitration. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 2 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2024] SGCA 41 about?
DFM v DFL ([2024] SGCA 41) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Arbitration — Award — Interim award — Whether Respondent to arbitration waived his jurisdictional objection in application for interim relief”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 41 consider?
The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A), International Arbitration Act (Cap 10), and UK Arbitration Act (Cap 10). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2024] SGCA 41 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 71. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
How influential is [2024] SGCA 41?
Within this corpus, [2024] SGCA 41 has been cited by 2 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.
What issue did DFM v DFL [2024] SGCA 41 address?
The Court of Appeal considered whether a respondent to an arbitration had waived his jurisdictional objection through an application for interim relief, in the context of enforcing a provisional award from DIAC Arbitration No 60 of 2022. Sundaresh Menon CJ delivered the grounds on 17 October 2024.
What freezing order was sought in the arbitration underlying DFM v DFL ([2024] SGCA 41)?
Through the interim relief application that led to the Provisional Award of 16 November 2022, the respondent sought, among other orders, a freezing order against the appellant's assets up to the value of US$90,826,522, issued by an arbitral tribunal in the Dubai International Arbitration Centre.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (13)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 41)