DPT v DPV

Q: Which legislation does [2026] SGCA(I) 4 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50) and The appellant commenced adjudication proceedings against the respondent under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2026] SGCA(I) 4 Court of Appeal (International) 15 September 2026 CA/CAS 8/2025 51 min read

20 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Featured in the weekly digest — week of 14–20 September 2026 →

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal (International)
Decided	15 September 2026
Judges	Ang Cheng Hock, Kannan Ramesh, Robert French
Charges / claim	Arbitration
Counsel	Duxton Hill Chambers, Providence Law Asia LLC, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, Sim Chong LLC, Avinash Vinayak Pradhan, Liang Hanwen Calvin, Poon Kin Mun Kelvin, Ryan Baptista, Sim Chong, Timothy James Chong Wen An, Yu Kexin, Zhuo Jiaxiang

Source: [2026] SGCA(I) 4, Court of Appeal (International), decided 15 September 2026 — eLitigation. Updated 14 October 2026.

Catchwords

Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Breach of natural justice

Practice Areas

Arbitration

Judges (3)

Ang Cheng Hock Coram Kannan Ramesh Delivered Robert French Coram

Counsel (12)

Duxton Hill Chambers Firm Providence Law Asia LLC Firm Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Firm Sim Chong LLC Firm Avinash Vinayak Pradhan Counsel for the appellant Liang Hanwen Calvin Counsel for the respondent Poon Kin Mun Kelvin Counsel for the appellant

Ryan Baptista Counsel for the appellant

Sim Chong Counsel for the respondent Timothy James Chong Wen An Counsel for the appellant Yu Kexin Counsel for the respondent Zhuo Jiaxiang Counsel for the respondent

Parties (5)

DPT Appellant

DPU Appellant

DPV Respondent

DPW Respondent

DPX Respondent

Case Significance

DPT and another v DPV and others [2026] SGCA(I) 4 was decided by the Court of Appeal (Ang Cheng Hock JCA, Kannan Ramesh JAD and Robert French IJ) on 15 September 2026, with Kannan Ramesh JAD delivering the judgment, in CA/CAS 8/2025. The Appellants appealed against the Singapore International Commercial Court's dismissal of SIC/OA 10/2025, an application to set aside a Partial Award in a SIAC arbitration arising from the conversion of convertible loan notes that diluted the Respondents' shareholding in DPX from 10.71% to 0.4%. The issues were alleged breaches of natural justice concerning the buy-out and the Responsive Evidence. The court dismissed the appeal as an impermissible merits-review, declined a non-party costs order and indemnity costs, and fixed costs at $90,000 (all-in).

[2026] SGCA(I) 4 explained

DPT v DPV ([2026] SGCA(I) 4) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal (International) on 15 September 2026. It is categorised under Arbitration. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, 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 [2026] SGCA(I) 4 about?

DPT v DPV ([2026] SGCA(I) 4) is a Court of Appeal (International) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside” and “Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Breach of natural justice”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2026] SGCA(I) 4 consider?

The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50) and The appellant commenced adjudication proceedings against the respondent under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGCA(I) 4 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2025] SGHC(I) 29. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2026] SGCA(I) 4?

Within this corpus, [2026] SGCA(I) 4 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. 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 was DPT v DPV [2026] SGCA(I) 4 about?

DPT and another v DPV and others [2026] SGCA(I) 4 was an appeal against the dismissal of an application to set aside a Partial Award in a SIAC arbitration, on grounds of breach of natural justice. The Court of Appeal dismissed it.

What costs did the Court of Appeal order in [2026] SGCA(I) 4?

The court fixed the costs of CAS 8 at $90,000 (all-in), payable by the Appellants to the Respondents on the standard basis. It declined to order costs against the parent company as a non-party and declined indemnity costs.

Statutes Cited

Companies Act (Cap 50)

s 216(1) s 216(2)(d)

The appellant commenced adjudication proceedings against the respondent under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B)

Cases Cited (20)

SG (1)

[2025] SGHC(I) 29

SLR (19)

[2007] 3 SLR(R) 86 [2010] 3 SLR 542 [2011] 1 SLR 582 [2013] 1 SLR 125 [2015] 3 SLR 488 [2016] 2 SLR 118 [2018] 2 SLR 1311 [2018] 2 SLR 532 [2020] 1 SLR 695 [2021] 1 SLR 276 [2021] 2 SLR 235 [2022] 1 SLR 1080 [2022] 1 SLR 505 [2022] 3 SLR 447 [2024] 3 SLR 169 [2024] 5 SLR 706 [2025] 1 SLR 526 [2025] 1 SLR 806 [2026] 1 SLR 825