The Problem with Rakna – The Scope of the Preclusive Effect of Article 16(3) of the Model Law: Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v Avant Garde Maritime Services (Pte) Ltd  SGHC 78
Albert Monichino QC
(2019) 31 SAcLJ 349
In Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v Avant Garde Maritime Services (Pte) Ltd  SGHC 78, Quentin Loh J extended the preclusive effect of Art 16(3) of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (“the Model Law”) to a party that did not participate in the arbitration. It is respectfully submitted that this holding is wrong. The decision inappropriately extrapolates from Singapore Court of Appeal obiter comments in PT First Media TBK v Astro Nusantara International BV  1 SLR 372 and does not grapple with the Model Law’s travaux or prior Singaporean authority – which consider non-participating and boycotting parties to be excluded from Art 16(3)’s preclusive effect. Nor do considerations of cost and efficiency support broadening the preclusive effect of Art 16(3) to such parties.