新闻与见解

In 2014, the English Court of Appeal in Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd v Altomart Ltd (No 2) [2015] Ch 589 (“Salford Estates”) held that a winding up petition brought based on a disputed debt subject to an arbitration agreement ought to be stayed or dismissed, save in “wholly exceptional circumstances”.

The Singapore Court of Appeal (“SGCA”) largely followed Salford Estates in AnAn Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v VTB Bank (Public Joint Stock Co) [2020] 1 SLR 1158 (“AnAn v VTB”), and held that the Singapore courts will apply a prima facie standard of review when determining whether to stay or dismiss a winding up petition brought based on a disputed debt subject to an arbitration agreement.

In the recent judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Sian Participation Corp (in liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd [2020] UKPC 16 (“Sian v Halimeda”), the Privy Council concluded that Salford Estates was wrongly decided. Instead, the Privy Council found that a winding up petition brought based on a disputed debt subject to an arbitration agreement ought to be stayed or dismissed only when the debt is disputed on genuine and substantial grounds.

The decision in Sian v Halimeda calls into question whether the AnAn test is correct, or whether it needs to be replaced with a different test.

Click here to view the article.