Singapore: A Mix of Traditional and New Rules

  • Adeline ChongEmail author
Part of the Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law book series (GSCL, volume 37)


The applicable rules differ depending on whether the Singapore High Court (not including the Singapore International Commercial Court), the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”), or a foreign forum is named in an optional choice of court agreement. If the Singapore High Court (not including the SICC) or a foreign forum is named in the agreement, the traditional rules apply, although there are certain differences depending on whether the chosen court is local or foreign and the context of the case. The SICC regime departs from the traditional rules by relying on a presumption of exclusivity if party intentions as to the nature of the choice of court agreement are not made clear, and by abrogating the need to obtain leave to serve the writ on a defendant abroad. The test for the exercise of jurisdiction is also different and generally designed to make it harder for the SICC to refuse jurisdiction.


  1. Chong A, Yip M (2019) Singapore as a centre for International Commercial Litigation: party autonomy to the fore. J Private Int Law 15(1):97–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hartley T, Dogauchi M (2005) Explanatory report: convention of 30 June 2005 on choice of court agreements. Accessed 29 Jan 2019
  3. Lee J (2003) Non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses – changing approaches? Singapore J Leg Stud, pp 593–600Google Scholar
  4. Yeo TM (2005) The contractual basis of the enforcement of exclusive and non-exclusive choice of court agreements. Singapore Acad Law J 17:306–360Google Scholar
  5. Yeo TM (2009) Halsbury’s laws of Singapore, vol 6(2). LexisNexis, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  6. Yeo TM (2015) Staying relevant: exercise of jurisdiction in the age of the SICC. Eighth Yong Pung How Professorship of Law Lecture 2015. Accessed 29 Jan 2019
  7. Yip M (2016) The resolution of disputes before the Singapore International Commercial Court. Int Comp Law Q 65:439–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Singapore Management University, School of LawSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations