Are Mediated Settlement Agreements In Singapore Enforceable Overseas

3.6.3 In most private mediations, the parties would generally reduce the terms of the agreement in writing and sign the document. It would be a legally binding agreement. The applicability of such transaction agreements is therefore subject to normal conventional principles. The decisions of the Court of Appeal of Gay Choon Ing/Loh Se Ti Terence Peter [2009] 2 SLR 332 and Ng Chee Weng/Lim Jit Ming Bryan [2015] 3 SLR 92 are examples of how contract training principles have been used to find meaningful compromise agreements. In addition, the Chan Gek Yong court considered against Violet Netto [2018] SGHC 208 whether allegations of coercive and disabling disability and incompetence invalidated a mediation regime. In practice, implementation is not normally an issue, as the parties voluntarily reach a negotiated solution. However, in the event of a problem, enforcement can become a procedural problem, especially in cross-border situations where one party can be tried by the jurisdiction of the other party and must initiate a procedure to execute the transaction. The negotiated transaction agreement may be an additional step in the pursuit of a long dispute settlement journey. Some institutions have attempted to ensure the direct cross-border applicability of negotiated transaction agreements by combining mediation and the characteristics of arbitration.

These processes include „Arb-Med-Arb“ (as developed by the Singapore International Mediation Centre[3] ) and „Med-Arb“ (as is the case in China and some other Asian jurisdictions, including Japan). In these trials, the parties attempt to resolve their dispute through mediation and, if successful, to have the negotiated settlement agreement registered by an arbitration tribunal as enforceable consent under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitration Awards (the „New York Convention“). Despite achieving this objective, the „Arb-Med Arb“ and „Med-Arb“ processes are rarely used in cross-border litigation, perhaps because of the cost and ineffectiveness of the procedures, to require both a mediator and an arbitrator. 3.6.4 In the case of pending court proceedings, the transaction contract may provide that its terms are considered an approval judgment or a court decision. The Court of Appeal of the Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd/Yeo Boong Hua [2017] 2 SLR 12 pointed out that such an approval decision was contractual in nature and replaced the original reason and closed the proceedings.