Duane Morris and Selvam

By Leonard Loh

Key Takeaway: The need for an additional step (as required under the Singapore Rules of Court 2021) (“ROC 2021”) before being allowed to introduce expert evidence and the attendant additional costs and risks could reduce the attractiveness of litigation in Singapore in favour of arbitration. All should thus be aware of the additional complexities introduced by ROC 2021, and consider whether litigation under Singapore law remains the best solution in a dispute or if arbitration is the better option.

One of the changes made by ROC 2021 is to introduce court control over a party’s previously unrestricted right to introduce expert evidence. If a litigant wishes to introduce his own expert to give evidence, he has to convince the Court, among other things, that (1) expert evidence will contribute materially to the determination of any issue and (2) that the default rule that parties are to agree on one common expert should be departed.

While this change is welcomed when viewed through the lens of expeditious proceedings and efficient use of court resources (see Order 3, Rule 1(2) of the ROC 2021), it requires lawyers and (potential) litigants to grapple with the additional complexities of litigation in Singapore. This article will discuss a couple of such additional complexities and discuss whether they increase the attractiveness of arbitration, especially in complex disputes where expert evidence is an important, if not integral, part of the process.

Continue reading “Expert Evidence Under the Singapore Rules of Court 2021: Advantage Arbitration?”