CVV and others vs CWB

This case involved an appeal against a decision of the Singapore International Commercial Court, which refused to set aside an arbitral award for alleged breaches of natural justice.

TLDR:

• CVV and others appealed against a decision refusing to set aside an arbitral award.
• The appellants claimed breaches of natural justice and procedural irregularities.
• The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the arbitral award.

The parties involved in this case were CVV and others (the appellants) and CWB (the respondent). CVQ, a fund management company, engaged CWB as an asset advisor for two funds. Disputes arose over unpaid advisory fees, leading to arbitration.

In the arbitration, the tribunal dismissed the claims of CVQ and its subsidiaries and allowed CWB's counterclaims for unpaid fees. The tribunal's award included significant sums for management and performance fees.

CVQ and its subsidiaries sought to set aside the award, alleging breaches of natural justice, including bias and failure to consider their objections. They also disputed the tribunal's acceptance of CWB's calculations for fees.

The Singapore International Commercial Court dismissed the application, finding no breaches of natural justice. The court held that the tribunal had applied its mind to the issues and provided adequate reasons for its decisions.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision. The appellate court found that the tribunal had not breached the fair hearing rule and had considered the essential issues. The appellants' objections were found to be without merit.

The Court of Appeal emphasized the importance of finality in arbitration and the limited grounds for curial intervention. The tribunal's findings on the advisory fees were based on the best available evidence, given the appellants' failure to provide alternative calculations.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay costs.

Legal representatives: N Sreenivasan SC, Tan Kai Ning Claire, and Wah Kai Lin Kelly (K&L Gates Straits Law LLC) for the appellants; Chan Tai-Hui Jason SC, Kek Meng Soon Kelvin, Toh Jia Yi, and Alisa Toh Qian Wen (Allen & Gledhill LLP) for the respondent.

Judicial Panel: Judith Prakash JCA, Steven Chong JCA, and Robert French IJ

Case Citation Reference: [2023] SGCA(I) 9