We caught up with Justice Philip Jeyaretnam FCIArb, Judge of the High Court of Singapore and President of the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), on how the Singapore ADR landscape has changed over the years. 

Journey into ADR

When Justice Jeyaretnam started his practice in Singapore in the late 1980s, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) was not widespread. At the time, dispute resolution was court-based, with the exception of domestic construction arbitration. However, that was all about to change. “Singapore developed as an arbitration seat around the millennium, after a number of initiatives were undertaken, including the adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law, the enactment of the International Arbitration Act 1994, and then the establishment of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC),” he explains. The advent of Maxwell Chambers, an integrated dispute resolution complex, solidified Singapore as an arbitration seat – a venture that Justice Jeyaretnam was also heavily involved in.

“During that period, like many other people who had a practice before the courts, I started to get into arbitration work,” he says, noting that it involved a mindset shift as arbitration was different from court procedure. “Through experience and learning, I got to grips with arbitration law, practice, and procedure.”

By the mid-2000s, the balance of his work had shifted due to the sheer volume of arbitrations in Singapore. “Before I joined the Bench at the beginning of 2021, half my matters were in arbitration. Half of my hearing days would be in arbitration,” he says. “Cross-border dispute resolution is booming. The numbers of arbitrations where the seat is Singapore have gone up tremendously over the last 15 years.”

The future of ADR

Justice Jeyaretnam acknowledges that his experience is different from the challenges that aspiring ADR professionals face today. However, he’s hopeful about the future of ADR; he believes that the expansion of arbitration has given opportunities to younger people.

“The market in arbitration has become global. In the past, there was always domestic arbitrations, and some countries would have more domestic arbitrations than others. The rise of international arbitration in the last 30 years has created a global market,” he says. One of the results of this global market, Justice Jeyaretnam believes, is the advent of overlapping networks that ADR professionals can tap into for opportunities. There are networks for everyone on subject matter, regional and national, as well as many networks for female arbitrators as well. “Plug into whatever networks appeal to you – and the Ciarb network as well,” he advises.

As there is such a high volume of work, it’s vital to broaden the pool of arbitrators. “As a young arbitrator, one has the advantage of giving one’s full attention to the work,” he says. “I’m positive about what the future holds for young practitioners. First of all, dispute resolution has become global, and that’s a good thing – it creates more opportunities. And with the growth of dispute resolution, the demand creates opportunities for young people to come through; naturally, businesses will be looking for the most cost-efficient way of dealing with things.”

Another key ingredient in the route to becoming an arbitrator is training. “The training that Ciarb provides is a must – it’s essential – for anyone that wants to work in arbitration,” he says. “The future of arbitration is global and international, so you have to be prepared to travel,” he advises. “Despite the availability of platforms like Zoom, most evidentiary hearings are in person. When I was practicing as counsel, I did arbitrations in Singapore, Hong Kong, London, and Switzerland.”

Career highlight

“It’s hard to talk about arbitrations because by nature they are private and confidential,” says Justice Jeyaretnam. “However, there are a few cases that come to mind that were memorable. Whenever the stakes are high for the client, the case becomes more fraught and more fulfilling – if you get a good result or outcome. I’ve had some of those cases in arbitration.”

Another highlight for the Justice was his role in the development of Maxwell Chambers in Singapore. When he was a counsel in private practice, he was given the opportunity to chair the Board of Maxwell Chambers, which he held for 10 years. He led the development of an additional conserved heritage building that became hearing rooms and places for arbitral institutions such as SIAC and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). 

“It was very rewarding,” he explains. “One of the important things for us to do was to make sure the arbitrators were happy. If they weren’t happy with Singapore, then they'd do hearings elsewhere. As an arbitration centre, Maxwell Chambers bolsters the choice of Singapore as a seat.”

The move to the Bench

Sitting on the Bench, Justice Philip principally hears commercial matters, both in the general division of the High Court and the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC). “I focus on corporate disputes, shareholder disputes, breaches of directors’ duties, and commercial trade deals between parties that have gone wrong,” he explains.

“I also hear a lot of challenges from arbitration awards: I hear four or five challenges in the course of a year. The good thing is that the judiciary in Singapore is generally quite well-supported. I have the benefit of having a justice’s law clerk,” he says.

One great benefit of being a judge is time to reflect. “You’re able to think about the law more deeply than when you’re counsel. Additionally, you have a role in developing the law, which you don’t get when you’re counsel in a case. Of course, it’s a lot lonelier than being counsel.”

It wasn’t long before he was branching out in new directions. “After I’d been on the Bench for a year, I was appointed to head SICC from 2 Jan 2023, which adds a new dimension to what I do. We are a new Court and an international commercial Court, celebrating our tenth anniversary with a big public conference in January 2025.”

New developments

“At the invitation of the Bahrain judiciary, the SICC has collaborated with them to set up its own international commercial court, modelled on the SICC, which will launch next year,” reveals Justice Jeyaretnam. He explains that the governments of Bahrain and Singapore have entered into a treaty, under which appeals from the new Bahrain Court will come to what will be called the International Committee of the SICC.

“This is a way of establishing the expertise and credibility of the new Bahrain International Commercial Court, because parties will know that they can come to a Court modelled after the SICC, and in the event of an appeal, they have the option of bringing it to the SICC – an established international commercial court. It’s groundbreaking; for the first time in the international commercial space – the possibility of appeals going from one court to another.”

Another exciting new development that Justice Jeyaretnam is involved in is a collaboration between the SICC and the Singapore Mediation Centre (SMC) on a new ADR service called the Integrated Appropriate Dispute Resolution Framework (INTEGRAF). A framework for the management of complex conflicts arising from large projects or commercial transactions, INTEGRAF will allow parties to apply one or more modes of dispute resolution solutions to different aspects of a dispute.

“We describe it as appropriate dispute resolution rather than alternative dispute resolution, because it’s important to keep in mind the role of the courts. Parties want the best place to take their dispute – it might be arbitration, mediation, adjudication, or a neutral evaluation. But it also might be in court - whether for the whole or a part of it,” explains Justice Jeyaretnam. “It’s a way of thinking innovatively about how best to deal with complex disputes.”

“Parties choose a neutral professional who acts like a signal person and can direct the parties to go down a particular route. For example, to hive off the question of law first for the court, and then have some factual questions decided by an arbitrator, or by neutral evaluation by an expert in a particular field.”