Judgment Header
The "Titan Unity" [2013] SGHCR 28
Court DecisionSGHCR
[2013] SGHCR 28
[2013] SGHCR 28
High Court of Singapore19 Dec 2013Admiralty in Rem No 276 of 2012 (Summons No 4021 and 4490 of 2013)
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 2 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
2Later cases and laws citing this decision
“time bar is typically an issue which rightly should be determined in the arbitration. The nature of the condition sought in the present case was thus significant – as was observed in The Titan Unity [2013] SGHCR 28 (“The Titan Unity”) at [47]:”
“o a protracted examination of the evidence to make a finding on the merits that an arbitration agreement exists [or does not exist] on a balance of probabilities at the stay stage”: The “Titan Unity” [2013] SGHCR 28 (“The “Titan Unity””) at [34], cited with approval in Tomolugen at [58]. This would be inconsistent with”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Admiralty in Rem No 276 of 2012 (Summons No 4021 and 4490 of 2013)
Case Metadata
Court: High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2013-12-19
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.