Singapore Court of Appeal dismisses Sealing Application

In Karan Chandur Tilani v Maarten Hein Bernard Koedijk and others [2024] SGCA 46 ("Tilani") the Court of Appeal held that the confidentiality of arbitral proceedings ceases when the information has already been made public in non-arbitral proceedings. 

The claimant commenced arbitration proceedings against the respondent, seeking payment under two contracts with the respondent. The respondent counterclaimed for fraud. The Singapore arbitrator dismissed the claim and upheld the counterclaim.

The claimant applied to the Singapore High Court for a sealing order. Ultimately, the High Court ordered the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings and granted the sealing order.  On July 12, 2024, the plaintiff filed an application for sealing to prevent the publication of information relating to CA 22. The plaintiff argued that the appellate court should grant the sealing order in accordance with the arbitration order. The respondent opposed the sealing order, arguing in particular that the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings had already been lost by the complainant's disclosure of the final award in the SD proceedings.

The sealing motion was denied by the Court of Appeal. It emphasized that the appellant had to prove that the confidentiality of the arbitration was still in order for the courts to avoid "an empty exercise in protecting confidentiality where there is nothing left to protect". It concluded that the confidentiality of the arbitration had indeed been compromised. The disclosure of the award in the SD proceedings resulted in the award becoming part of the court record and thus already available to the public.