Enforcement is a critical stage in resolving disputes by arbitration. While many losing parties comply voluntarily with an award, some do not, making enforcement necessary. This can be complex, particularly when enforcing in a foreign jurisdiction or against state assets. This note provides practical guidance on the Singapore regime.
<p><span class="news-text_italic-underline">a. International Conventions</span><p>
<p><span class="news-text_italic-underline">b. Singapore Arbitration Legislation</span><p>
<p><span class="news-text_italic-underline">a. Domestic Awards</span><p>
Under Singapore law, domestic awards fall into two main categories. First, there are domestic arbitral awards, which are awards rendered in Singapore where the IAA does not apply. These awards are enforceable under section 46 of the AA with the leave of the court and once leave is granted, they may be enforced in the same way as a court judgment. Second, there are domestic international awards, which are international arbitration awards rendered by a tribunal seated in Singapore. Such awards may be enforced under section 19 of the IAA, again with the leave of the High Court and are treated as having the same effect as a court judgment.
<p><span class="news-text_italic-underline">c. Foreign Awards</span><p>
Foreign awards are also recognised and enforceable in Singapore under the framework of the IAA. A foreign award is defined in section 27(1) of the IAA as an arbitral award made in the territory of a state that is a contracting party to the NYC, other than Singapore itself. The recognition and enforcement of such awards are governed by Part III of the IAA, which incorporates the provisions of the Convention into Singapore law. Subject to the requirements of Part III, a foreign award may be enforced in Singapore either by commencing an action upon the award or in the same manner as a domestic international award under section 19 of the IAA. Once enforceable, a foreign award is recognised as binding for all purposes on the parties between whom it was made and it may be relied upon in legal proceedings in Singapore, whether by way of defence, set-off or otherwise.
Both the AA and IAA define “awards” broadly to include final, partial, interlocutory and interim awards. Money awards, declaratory awards, injunctions and provisional measures are enforceable with leave of court.
Non-monetary obligations are also enforceable. Awards outside this scope, or awards not made in international commercial arbitration (except ICSID awards under the ICSID regime), are excluded.
In Singapore, a distinction is drawn between the recognition and the enforcement of arbitral awards. Recognition refers to the process by which an award is given legal effect within the jurisdiction, so that it is treated as binding on the parties. Enforcement, on the other hand, goes further: it involves obtaining the assistance of the court to compel compliance with the award, such as through execution proceedings.
For both domestic and foreign awards, the process generally requires the successful party to apply to the General Division of the High Court for leave to enforce the award. Once leave has been granted, the order must be served on the award debtor. The debtor then has fourteen days from the date of service—or such longer period as the court directs if service is effected outside Singapore—to apply to set aside the enforcement order. Until that period has expired, or until any application to set aside has been finally disposed of, the award cannot be executed.
The procedure for enforcing arbitral awards in Singapore generally follows a two-stage process. First, the award creditor must apply to the General Division of the High Court for leave to enforce the award. This application is made without notice to the other party and must be supported by an affidavit exhibiting the arbitration agreement and the original or a certified copy of the award. In the case of foreign awards, a certified translation may also be required if the documents are not in English.
If the court grants leave, the order must then be served on the award debtor. The debtor then has fourteen days from service—longer if service is effected abroad—to apply to set aside the order. During this period, enforcement cannot proceed. If no application is made, or if any challenge is unsuccessful, the order becomes final and the award may be enforced in the same way as a court judgment, using the usual mechanisms such as writs of seizure and sale, garnishee proceedings or other execution measures.
Once leave is final, awards may be executed using the same procedures as court judgments, including writs of seizure and sale, garnishee orders, possession orders and examination of the judgment debtor.
The enforcement of arbitral awards against states in Singapore is governed by the State Immunity Act 1979, which is largely modelled on UK legislation and adopts a restrictive approach. Under this framework, states enjoy immunity from the jurisdiction of Singapore’s courts unless one of the statutory exceptions applies. Such exceptions include circumstances where the state has entered into a commercial transaction, holds or uses immovable property in Singapore, or has expressly agreed in writing to submit disputes to arbitration. In addition, while state property is in principle immune from execution, this protection is not absolute. Execution may proceed where the state has given its written consent, or where the property concerned is used, or intended to be used, for commercial purposes.
Singapore offers a clear and reliable framework to reinforce arbitral awards, supported by its adherence to international conventions and a pro-enforcement judiciary. With its robust legislation, streamlined procedures and limited grounds for resisting enforcement, Singapore continues reinforcing its reputation as one of the world’s leading arbitration hubs.
