AQZ v. ARA

ARA (the buyer) (defendant) began arbitration proceedings for breach of contract against AQZ (the supplier) (plaintiff) at the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC). The arbitration agreement provided for a three-person arbitration tribunal and stated that arbitration would be conducted in accordance with the laws of the SIAC. The agreement did not state that any particular version of the SIAC rules should govern. The 2010 SIAC Rules were in effect at the time of the arbitration proceeding. The SIAC president appointed a sole arbitrator to decide the dispute under Rule 5 of the 2010 SIAC Rules, which permitted the president to discretionarily refer certain disputes to a single arbitrator for expedited proceedings. The supplier participated in arbitration but reserved the right to challenge the result. The arbitrator issued a ruling and partial award favoring the buyer, finding that the supplier had breached the contract. The supplier argued that the ruling should be set aside for two procedural reasons. First, the supplier argued that the SIAC rules in effect at the time the contract was entered into, the 2007 SIAC Rules, did not provide for expedited arbitration proceedings as established in Rule 5 of the 2010 SIAC Rules. Second, the supplier argued that it was improper to appoint one arbitrator because the agreement stated that disputes should be arbitrated by a three-member tribunal.