SIAC launches its 7th edition rules

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) has just launched the 7th Edition of its Arbitration Rules, which will come into force on 1 January 2025 (the “2025 Rules”). The 2025 Rules are the product of an extensive consultation process, where user feedback was gathered on the previous rules (the “2016 Rules”) and a set of draft rules - see our earlier blogpost on that consultation here. The proposals from the draft rules have largely been adopted in the final version of the 2025 Rules.

We summarise a few of the key themes and procedural innovations under the 2025 Rules.

More routes to accelerated proceedings

The 2025 Rules introduce a new “Streamlined Procedure” (Rule 13, Schedule 2) where the proceedings are heard by a sole arbitrator and must conclude within 3 months of the Tribunal’s constitution. The procedure applies to disputes valued at SGD 1 million or less (albeit with leeway for the SIAC President to decide that it should not apply in any particular case), and parties can also choose to apply it by consent (or, conversely, opt out of it altogether).  The 3-month timeline is one of the shortest available under the leading arbitral rules. For disputes exceeding SGD 1 million, the 2025 Rules separately retain the previous provisions for a 6-month Expedited Procedure (Rule 14, Schedule 3), but the default upper-value threshold for this procedure has been increased from SGD 6 million to SGD 10 million, and its application has been widened from cases of “exceptional urgency” under the 2016 Rules, to where “the circumstances of the case warrant” its application.  This is likely to increase the scope for application of the Expedited Procedure.

The existing procedure for Emergency Arbitration (Rule 12.1 and Schedule 1) has also been enhanced.  Applications for Emergency Arbitration previously had to be filed together with or after a Notice of Arbitration was filed, but can now be sought ahead of filing a Notice of Arbitration.  This is likely to significantly expedite the process of seeking emergency relief and reduce the legal costs involved.  Parties can also now obtain protective preliminary orders within the Emergency Procedure on an ex parte basis.  This was previously not possible as the counterparty would have been served with the Notice of Arbitration and the application for Emergency Arbitration.

Procedural innovations to increase efficiency

A number of provisions have been introduced which enhance the Tribunal’s ability to streamline the conduct of proceedings.  To highlight a few of these:

• Coordinated Proceedings (Rule 17) introduces a mechanism allowing a Tribunal hearing multiple arbitrations which share common legal or factual issues, to conduct the arbitrations concurrently or sequentially, to align certain procedural aspects, or to suspend one arbitration pending determination of another. This compliments the existing Consolidation regime (Rule 16), which applies to multiple disputes relating to the same legal relationships or underlying transactions, and where the arbitration agreements are compatible. The Coordinated Proceedings mechanism could be useful in disputes arising under standard form agreements (such as standard banking documentation, or user platform terms), where disputes arising from different transactions and concerning different parties may engage similar legal issues. It will be interesting to see how widely the procedure is used in practice, given that it is limited in application to where the same Tribunal has been constituted in all the arbitrations.
• Preliminary Determination (Rule 46) empowers the Tribunal to make final determinations of particular issues ahead of the final award. Tribunals generally already possess an inherent power to issue multiple awards at different points in time in the proceedings (for example, under s 19A of the Singapore International Arbitration Act), but the Preliminary Determination procedure expressly articulates that power within the 2025 Rules, and also provides a timeline of 90 days from the filing of the application for the preliminary determination to be issued. The procedure also complements the existing Early Dismissal procedure (Rule 47), where claims or defences may be dismissed on the basis that they are manifestly without legal merit or outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Rule 47 is substantially similar to that under the 2016 Rules, but the timeline for decision has been shortened from 60 days to 45 days, and the limit of “exceptional circumstances” for extension of this timeline has been removed.
• Administrative Conference (Rule 11) provides for the Registrar of the SIAC to hold administrative conferences with parties prior to the formation of the Tribunal, to discuss procedural or administrative matters. Previously, the first discussion of procedural or administrative matters would typically take place during a first case management conference or procedural hearing after the Tribunal’s constitution. The administrative conference procedure might be useful in cases where Emergency Arbitration proceedings have been brought in advance of Tribunal constitution; where there are complexities around the process of appointing the Tribunal; or in cases where use of the Consolidated Proceedings or Coordinated Proceedings mechanisms are contemplated.
• Encouraging the use of mediation: The 2025 Rules encourage Parties and the Tribunal to consider use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as mediation including under the SIAC-SIMC Arb-Med-Arb Protocol. Parties are encouraged to consider such measures at the outset of the arbitration (Rules 6.4 and 7.3), and Tribunals are prompted to consider this at the first case management conference (Rule 32.4) or any stage of the arbitration (Rule 50.2).

Formalising requirements for funded cases (Rule 38):  A significant change is the introduction of formal requirements for cases involving third party funding.  Parties are required to disclose the existence of any third-party funding agreement and the funders’ identity and contact details in their Notice of Response or as soon as practicable.  Tribunals may also order Parties to disclose funding details, and can take the existence of funding into account when apportioning costs.  However, the disclosure and existence of a third-party funding agreement on its own is not to be taken as an indication of the financial status of a party.  These provisions reflect the guidance on third party funding that was previously stated in the SIAC’s Practice Note on Cases Involving External Funding.  This is welcome given the increased use of arbitration funding, and the gradual liberation of litigation and arbitration funding regimes in these jurisdictions.

Publication of awards (Rule 60)

Rule 60.1 provides that SIAC, with the agreement in writing of all parties, may publish a redacted decision, ruling, order, or award of a Tribunal. This differs from the position in its consultation draft (which proposed a form of deemed consent) and largely maintains the position in the 2016 SIAC Rules (except now with a requirement of written consent, but without the need for the tribunal to consent).

Welcome changes?

The 2025 Rules are welcome largely for the increased menu of options and flexibility they provide to arbitrating parties and Tribunals.  A number of other arbitral institutions have also amended their rules in 2024, including the HKIAC, SHIAC and NAI.  The SIAC reports on its case statistics annually, including the numbers of cases where specific procedural mechanisms have been used (such as Expedited Procedures, Emergency Arbitration, Early Dismissal, Joinder, and Consolidation), and it will be interesting to observe how well-utilised the mechanisms under the new Rules will be at the end of 2025.

Click here to access the 2025 Rules.