DWJ v DWK
Featured in the weekly digest — week of 13–19 July 2026 →
Key facts
| Court | Singapore International Commercial Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Sir Nigel Teare |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure, Arbitration |
| Counsel | Drew & Napier LLC, Infinitus Law Corporation, Lai Yi Qian, Mahesh Rai s/o Vedprakash Rai, Tien De Ming, Grismond, Yong Wei Jun Jonathan |
Source: [2026] SGHC(I) 10, Singapore International Commercial Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
DWJ v DWK [2026] SGHC(I) 10 was decided by Sir Nigel Teare IJ in the Singapore International Commercial Court on 15 July 2026, after a hearing on 9 July 2026. The Claimant, DWJ, applied in OA 18 to set aside an arbitration award dated 16 December 2025 in which it was ordered to repay certain Refundable Payments to the Defendant, DWK. In SUM 1193, DWK sought security for the costs of defending the application, arguing that DWJ had its registered address in Hong Kong and no assets in Singapore. The issues were whether security should be ordered and in what amount. The court allowed SUM 1193 and ordered security for costs of $100,000, payable within 28 days, failing which the claim would be struck out.
[2026] SGHC(I) 10 explained
DWJ v DWK ([2026] SGHC(I) 10) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Singapore International Commercial Court on 15 July 2026. It is categorised under Civil Procedure and 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 [2026] SGHC(I) 10 about?
DWJ v DWK ([2026] SGHC(I) 10) is a Singapore International Commercial Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Costs — Security” and “Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC(I) 10 consider?
The judgment refers to Companies Act (Cap 50). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGHC(I) 10 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 178. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
How influential is [2026] SGHC(I) 10?
Within this corpus, [2026] SGHC(I) 10 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.
Summary
The Singapore International Commercial Court heard an application by the Defendant, DWK, for security for costs against the Claimant, DWJ, which was seeking to set aside an arbitration award dated 16 December 2025 under which DWJ was ordered to repay certain Refundable Payments. DWJ was registered in Hong Kong and had no assets in Singapore. The court allowed the application and ordered security of $100,000, payable into court or by solicitor's undertaking within 28 days, failing which the claim would be struck out.
What was DWJ v DWK [2026] SGHC(I) 10 about?
It concerned DWK's application for security for costs against DWJ, which sought to set aside an arbitration award dated 16 December 2025. DWJ was registered in Hong Kong and had no assets in Singapore.
How much security for costs did the court order in [2026] SGHC(I) 10?
Sir Nigel Teare IJ ordered DWJ to provide security for costs of $100,000, by payment into court or a solicitor's undertaking within 28 days. Unless security was provided, the claim to set aside the award would be struck out.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (4)
Cited By (2)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC(I) 10)