In a landmark ruling, the Court of Appeal of Singapore has set aside an arbitral award chaired by former Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra, due to a breach of natural justice. The award was part of a dispute linked to India’s Dedicated Freight Corridor project, where the tribunal’s judgment was found to contain extensive portions copied from unrelated arbitration cases.
The arbitration, involving a special purpose vehicle managing India’s freight corridors and a consortium of infrastructure companies, centered on a dispute over additional payments linked to increased minimum wages for workers in India, stemming from a 2017 government notification. The contract, which designated Singapore as the seat of arbitration, led the consortium to initiate proceedings in December 2021 under the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) rules.
However, what stood out in the judgment was the significant amount of copied content. The Court of Appeal observed that nearly 47 percent of the 451 paragraphs in the arbitral award were verbatim excerpts from two earlier arbitration proceedings that were also chaired by Justice Misra. The two other co-arbitrators in the current case had no knowledge of the content or context of the earlier cases, which created an imbalance in the decision-making process.
The court ruled that this extensive reproduction of previous decisions, without adjustments for the specifics of the case at hand, gave rise to an appearance of prejudgment and bias. The tribunal’s reliance on prior awards, instead of thoroughly evaluating the unique aspects of the dispute, led to a conclusion that was not based on an independent assessment of the issues.
The Singapore Court of Appeal’s judgment emphasized that the integrity of the decision-making process had been compromised. By drawing from prior awards, the tribunal failed to ensure that the parties received a fair hearing. Moreover, since the president of the tribunal, Justice Misra, had prior knowledge of the parallel arbitration proceedings, the co-arbitrators were placed at a disadvantage, leading to unequal access to information.
This ruling is a significant reminder of the high standards expected in international arbitration, particularly in maintaining fairness and impartiality. It also raises important questions about the involvement of retired judges in arbitration proceedings, especially when they may have prior knowledge of related cases. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that each case is considered independently, free from external influences or biases.
Read the Judgement Copy Here-
