SINGAPORE: THIRD-PARTY FUNDING OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION ON THE HORIZON By Raja Bose, Ashish Chugh and Aloysius Chang (Singapore) The Singapore government has announced that it is proposing several legislative amendments that would reform the law on third-party funding of disputes in Singapore by allowing it in certain categories of legal proceedings, including international arbitration, subject to conditions placed on the funders and new ethical obligations on the part of lawyers. In a press release issued in July 2016, the Ministry of Law of Singapore (“MinLaw”) said that it was launching a public consultation on third-party funding of disputes, lasting through the whole of July, during which public feedback was invited on two instruments: (i) the Civil Law (Amendment) Bill 2016 (the “Bill”), and (ii) the Civil Law (Third- Party Funding) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). The proposed legal framework was stated to be a “light touch” approach and will “[give] precedence to party autonomy and flexibility, with disclosure as the central tenet”. LEGALISING THIRD-PARTY FUNDING FOR INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION Singapore law currently restricts third- party funding of proceedings, with limited exceptions, due to the operation of the 38 | K&L Gates: ARBITRATION WORLD torts of maintenance and champerty which render champertous agreements void as being contrary to public policy. (See Otech Pakistan Pvt Ltd v Clough Engineering Ltd and another [2007] 1 SLR(R) 989, which held that the rule against champerty applies in both litigation and arbitration proceedings governed by Singapore law). The amendments in the Bill are such that the restriction will no longer apply to third-party funding contracts with qualified funders pertaining to international arbitration and related court/mediation proceedings. The Bill states that the Civil Law Act is to be amended by: (a) clarifying that the torts of maintenance and champerty are abolished in Singapore, and (b) providing that in certain prescribed categories of dispute resolution proceedings (“prescribed dispute resolution proceedings”), third-party funding contracts (which must be with a