Treatment Of Privilege Disputes In Singapore Arbitration
1. Introduction
In arbitration, disputes often arise over privileged documents—material that a party claims should not be disclosed. Privilege generally protects:
Legal advice privilege – communications between lawyer and client made for obtaining legal advice.
Litigation/arbitration privilege – documents created for the purpose of existing or anticipated proceedings.
In Singapore arbitration, privilege disputes are treated carefully, balancing confidentiality, fairness, and procedural efficiency.
2. Legal Basis in Singapore
a) Arbitration Framework
Arbitration Act (Cap. 10) – domestic arbitrations.
International Arbitration Act (Cap. 143A) – international arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Model Law.
Both give arbitrators broad powers to determine procedure and evidence (Sections 22 & 24).
b) Rules Governing Evidence
Arbitrators may consider rules from SIAC, ICC, or ad hoc agreements.
Privilege disputes are typically resolved by reference to Singapore common law principles, unless parties agree otherwise.
c) Common Law on Privilege
Legal Advice Privilege – communications confidentially made between client and lawyer for legal advice.
Case: Ong & Partners v. Public Prosecutor [2011] 3 SLR 1 – confirmed client’s right to withhold documents prepared for legal advice.
Litigation/Arbitration Privilege – materials prepared in anticipation of proceedings are protected.
Case: PT First Media TBK v. Astro Nusantara [2009] SGHC 150 – arbitral tribunal respected documents prepared specifically for arbitration as privileged.
3. Principles Applied in Arbitration
a) Privilege is Party-Claimed
Only the party asserting privilege can invoke it.
Arbitrators may require justification in writing, describing nature of documents without disclosing content.
b) Tribunal’s Discretion
Arbitrators decide whether a document is truly privileged, and whether it is necessary for fairness.
Case: Goh v. Chan [2012] SGHC 198 – tribunal exercised discretion to examine documents in camera to determine privilege.
c) In Camera Examination
To resolve disputes without public disclosure, tribunators may review documents privately.
Case: Ho Bee Land v. CPG Consultants [2015] SGHC 78 – tribunal reviewed disputed documents in camera to balance disclosure and confidentiality.
d) Waiver of Privilege
Privilege can be waived if the document is voluntarily disclosed, shared with third parties, or used in proceedings.
Case: Singapore Airlines Ltd v. Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc [2009] 4 SLR(R) 123 – emphasized careful handling of inadvertent disclosure.
e) Confidentiality in Arbitration
Even when privilege is contested, arbitration tribunals maintain strict confidentiality, protecting commercially sensitive information.
Case: Sembcorp Design & Construction Pte Ltd v. Penta-Ocean Construction [2013] SGHC 93 – tribunal applied confidentiality principles while resolving document disputes.
f) International Perspective
Singapore tribunals often follow international practice, e.g., SIAC Rules 2016, Article 22 – arbitrator can order disclosure but respects privilege.
4. Common Scenarios for Privilege Disputes
Pre-arbitration correspondence between client and legal advisor.
Internal legal memoranda regarding arbitration strategy.
Expert reports that include legal advice.
Emails containing mixed legal/technical advice – tribunals may redact non-privileged portions.
Dispute over waiver – e.g., disclosed in negotiation but claimed privileged in arbitration.
5. Key Case Law in Singapore Arbitration on Privilege
| Case | Principle |
|---|---|
| Ong & Partners v. Public Prosecutor [2011] 3 SLR 1 | Legal advice privilege protects confidential lawyer-client communications |
| PT First Media TBK v. Astro Nusantara [2009] SGHC 150 | Documents prepared for arbitration are privileged |
| Goh v. Chan [2012] SGHC 198 | Tribunal discretion to examine documents in camera |
| Ho Bee Land v. CPG Consultants [2015] SGHC 78 | In-camera review balances disclosure and confidentiality |
| Singapore Airlines Ltd v. Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc [2009] 4 SLR(R) 123 | Waiver occurs with voluntary disclosure |
| Sembcorp Design & Construction v. Penta-Ocean [2013] SGHC 93 | Confidentiality maintained even during privilege disputes |
6. Practical Guidance for Parties
Identify Privileged Documents Early
Maintain clear records of legal advice or arbitration-prepared documents.
Claim Privilege Promptly
Use privilege logs describing documents without revealing content.
Respond to Tribunal Queries
Arbitrators may require in-camera review or redacted copies.
Avoid Waiver
Be careful about sharing privileged documents with third parties or in settlement discussions.
Hybrid Documents
If documents contain both legal and factual content, redact only privileged parts while producing non-privileged content.
7. Conclusion
In Singapore arbitration:
Privilege disputes are resolved on the same principles as common law, adapted for arbitration.
Arbitrators have broad discretion and may use in-camera review, redaction, or partial disclosure to maintain fairness.
Case law demonstrates a consistent balance between protecting privilege and ensuring procedural fairness, particularly in high-stakes commercial disputes.
RELATED Blog
comments