Symbiosis Law School, Pune: Care Courage Competence Collaboration

SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE
Care Courage Competence Collaboration
ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

(CLINICAL COURSE- II)
I INTERNAL ASSIGNMENT
“Analysis and Explanation of the scope of Singapore Mediation
Convention.”
Name: Riya Gupta

Roll No.: 16010125131 Div.: B
Batch: 2016-2021 Programme: B.A. LL.B (Hons)
Mobile No.: +917030767096 E-mail ID: riya.gupta@symlaw.ac.in
Contents
Abstract.....................................................................................................................................3
Introduction..............................................................................................................................3
Key Provisions..........................................................................................................................4
Need to explain and analyse key provisions:.................................................................................4
I Internal Assignment- “Analysis and Explanation of the scope of Singapore Mediation Convention”
Article 1: Scope of Application.......................................................................................................4

Article 3: General Principles..........................................................................................................7
Article 4: Requirement for reliance on Settlement Agreement....................................................8
Article 5: Grounds for refusing to grant relief..............................................................................9
Article 8: Reservations..................................................................................................................10
Conclusion and Comments:..................................................................................................11
References and Bibliography................................................................................................13
2
Abstract
The United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from
Mediation i.e. The Singapore Convention, drafted in order to promote the enforceability of
International commercial settlement agreements entered into through mediation was
approved by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law in the year 2018
without much ratification and was open for signature. The United Nation’s General Assembly
adopted the convention in 2018 and the convention came into force on 12 th of September
2020, six months after deposit of the third instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval and
accession.
Introduction
The Convention of International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation i.e. The
Singapore Convention came into being after a series of rigorous discussions and negotiations
that began in the early 2014. The need to enact and enforce the treaty was first raised by the
United States which proposed that a multilateral convention must be enacted which would in
effect promote and regulate the enforceability of international commercial settlement
agreements entered into through mediation. The idea behind developing such convention was
to have in effect a convention that recognises and enforces Mediation awards as is done so by
New York Convention which recognises, promotes and enforces Arbitration Awards.
the Working Group in its 65th session inclined towards the formulation of a legislation rather
than a convention since many domestic legislations lacked the incorporation of mediation as
a method of dispute resolution1, however, in order to secure harmonious economic relations,
the Working Group in its 66th Session made a compromise proposal that provided a relief
mechanism for agreements settled through mediation while also providing scope for taking
into consideration the discrepancies in the Mediation method adopted domestically.2
The convention is known as Singapore Convention since the signing of the treaty by the
states convened at Singapore. Earlier there was no mechanism to enforce the agreements
settled through mediation and hence the dispute resolution mechanism in the International
Trade arena seldom opted mediation as a preferred resolution mechanism. Thus, the
1
Report of Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) on the Work of its Sixty-fifth Session, UNCITRAL, UN
Doc. A/CN.9/896 (2016), at para. 139.
2
Report of Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) on the Work of its Sixty-sixth Session, UNCITRAL, UN
Doc. A/CN.9/901 (2017), para. 52.
3
Convention is a crucial instrument in the International trade arena since it provides a relief
mechanism to the party/state which decides to enforce the international settlement agreement
entered into through mediation in a state which is also a party to the convention.
Thus, to put it in a nutshell, it can be said that the convention provides a new status to the
settlements reach through mediation in their own right and converts a rather purely private
contractual agreement into an instrument that has international legal enforceability.3
Key Provisions
The author in the article shall be providing an explanation and analysis of certain provisions
of the Convention which according to the author are significant to the effective
implementation of the Convention in the International trade arena.
Need to explain and analyse key provisions:

In order to understand the scope of the convention, the author felt that it is of extreme
importance to analyse the key provisions of the convention since the scope of the convention
cannot be realised until the impact of the articles supporting and facilitating the scope of
convention is analysed and explained.
These provisions are:
Article 1: Scope of Application4

The scope of Application of the convention is laid down under Article 1 of the Singapore
Mediation Convention. It is however, important to take into consideration the definitions laid
down under Article 2 of the Convention in order to get a better perspective and offer an
analysis to the same.
Article 1(1) of the Convention states that the provisions of the Convention shall be
applicable to an agreement entered into through mediation and one that is concluded in
writing by the parties to resolve commercial dispute, one of the parties having the place of
business in a different state.
The convention in Article 2 has defined ‘International’, ‘Writing’ and ‘Mediation’ explicitly,
however has not provided a definition as to what shall entail a ‘Commercial Dispute’. Thus, a
3
Timothy Schnabel, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Framework for the Cross-Border Recognition
and Enforcement of Mediated Settlements’ (2019) 19 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 1–60, 11. Available at:
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol19/iss1/1.
4
United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, 2018,
https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/singapore_convention_eng.pdf.
4
cope of interpretation arises due to the ambiguity as to what shall be defined as a

‘Commercial Dispute’. However, the Article exclusively states that the kind of settlement
agreements to which the convention shall not be made applicable in Article 1(2) 5 and Article
1(3)6 respectively.
This decision of excluding the definition as to what shall entail a ‘Commercial Dispute’ but
providing the list of settlement agreements to which the convention shall not be made
applicable, conveys the intention of the working committee to place the importance on the
‘Subject Matter’ of the dispute which in turn would facilitate to determine that whether the
dispute comes within the ambit of ‘Commercial Dispute’.
It is pertinent to note that, though the Convention does not explicitly define ‘Commercial
Dispute’, reliance could be place on the Model Law7 which has provided that a ‘Commercial
Dispute’ should be given a greater interpretation and shall include commercial transactions of
both contractual and private nature.
The convention under Article 2 defines ‘International’, ‘Agreement in Writing’ and

‘Mediation’ explicitly.
Under Article 1(1), the criteria to determine whether the dispute is of International nature or
not is prescribed by ‘establishing the place of business’, i.e. the place of business shall be
located in other state from that of the other party and should be having the closest relationship
to the dispute resolved by the settlement agreement. This article has striking similarity to the
Model Law. Another significant analysis that prevails from Article 1(1) is that the article
nowhere states the ‘state of origin’ shall be of consideration and significance and thereby
renders it an International status by making it a ‘stateless instrument’.8
Article 2(1) provides explanations to Article 1(1) and states the method to determine the
relevant place of business and provides for the solution to the circumstance wherein the party
5
This Convention does not apply to settlement agreements: (a) Concluded to resolve a dispute arising from
transactions engaged in by one of the parties (a consumer) for personal, family or household purposes; (b)
Relating to family, inheritance or employment law.
6
This Convention does not apply to: (a) Settlement agreements: (i) That have been approved by a court or
concluded in the course of proceedings before a court; and (ii) That are enforceable as a judgment in the State of
that court; (b) Settlement agreements that have been recorded and are enforceable as an arbitral award.
7
UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation with Guide to Enactment and Use 2002.
https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/ml-conc/03-90953_Ebook.pdf.
In this ‘Commercial Dispute’ is explained in the footnote to Article 1(1).
8
Bruno Zeller, Leon Trakman, ‘Mediation and arbitration: the process of enforcement’ (2019) Uniform L. Rev.,
available at https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unz020.
5
does not have a established place of business. In such a circumstance, the habitual residence
of the party shall be taken as the relevant ‘place of business.’
Thus, Article 1(1) primarily takes into consideration the ‘subject matter of the agreement’
while determining the place of business, whereas, Article 2(1) takes into consideration the
‘subject matter of the dispute’, thereby, facilitating the linking of the subject matter of the
agreement to the subject matter of the dispute in order to provide an enforceable settlement
agreement.
The definition of ‘written agreement’ has been well defined under Article 2(2) 9, thereby
leaving no scope for pertinent ambiguity as it also entails agreement in writing through
electronic form or any other accepted form of communication.
Article 1(1) states that the convention shall be applicable to an agreement that is a result of a
mediation. This is explained under Article 2(3)10 of the convention. The definition provided
under the convention has a striking resemblance to one provided under the Model Law, in the
sense that both the instruments are silent on a crucial provision pertaining to mediation, i.e.
the necessity of an impartial mediator. The lack of an exclusive provision laying down the
basic and most significant characteristic feature of mediation and mediator could have several
implications since the convention has made a provision 11 wherein the mediation settlement
agreement could be refused if the behaviour of the mediator is flawed or the mediation
procedure in itself is flawed. The problem shall arise as there is no pre-determined
characteristics laid down in the act so as to determine as to what shall constitute such flaws.
The convention is silent with respect to the adjudicatory power of the mediator and only
restricts its role to assisting the parties to reach an amicable solution thereby giving no
authority to impose a solution to the dispute.
Another drawback is the absence of a provision that would lay down the source of
mediation12, i.e. whether the parties to the agreement have voluntarily resorted to mediation
9
A settlement agreement is “in writing” if its content is recorded in any form. The requirement that a settlement
agreement be in writing is met by an electronic communication if the information contained therein is accessible
so as to be useable for subsequent reference.
10
“Mediation” means a process, irrespective of the expression used or the basis upon which the process is
carried out, whereby parties attempt to reach an amicable settlement of their dispute with the assistance of a
third person or persons (“the mediator”) lacking the authority to impose a solution upon the parties to the
dispute.
11
Art.5(f), United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, 2018,
https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/singapore_convention_eng.pdf
12
Elisabetta Silvestri, The Singapore Convention On Mediated Settlement Agreements: A New String To The
Bow Of International Mediation?, 08/08/2019.
6
or has resorted to mediation due to a court order or a legal rule, thereby making it mandatory
in nature. Many European countries have debated the need of making a provision that would
make mediation as mandatory in order to have greater effectiveness and implementation.13
Article 3: General Principles14

The Singapore Convention has abstained from laying down the enforcement mechanism but
has laid down certain pre-conditions that must be fulfilled in order to seek the enforceability
of the Settlement Agreement.
Article 3(1) of the Convention lays down that each party to the settlement agreement shall
enforce the same in consonance with the rules of procedure and under the conditions laid
down in the Convention.
The article is progressive in nature since it has done away with the need to seek consent of
the other party in order to seek the enforceability of the settlement agreement. This provides
an opportunity to the aggrieved party to seek relief without being dependent or left hanging at
the option of the other party. This is progressive when compared to the EU Directive on
Mediation15 which states otherwise.
Furthermore, under Article 3(2), it has been laid down that in order to prove that the matter
has been already resolved so as to invoke the settlement agreement, the same shall be done in
accordance with the rules of procedure and conditions laid down under the convention. This
is a provision which provides the opportunity to the party to use the settlement Agreement as
a defence in itself against the relief sought.16
Thus, though Article 3 does not lay down the process of enforcement, thereby leaving the
process of enforcement to be determined by the party to the agreement in tandem with the
provisions of the convention, but has sufficiently laid down the conditions that has to be
fulfilled in order to enforce the settlement agreement along with addressing the contingency
that may arise when a party contends that the matter has already been resolved and there
arises no need to enforce the settlement agreement again.
13
Elisabetta Silvestri, ‘Too Much of a Good Thing: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Italy’ (2017) 21
Netherlands-Vlaams Tijschrift voor Mediation en Conflict management 29
14
15
Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on Certain Aspects of
Mediation in Civil and Commercial Matters, 2008, Official Journal of the European Union (L 136).
16
Harmonising Trade Law to Enable Private Sector Regional Development (UNCITRAL Regional Centre for
Asia and the Pacific, 2017), 91–2.
7
According to the author, the absence of an enforcement mechanism in the convention shall
not be seen as a drawback but shall be seen as a practical approach taken by the working
committee in order to accommodate the discrepancies in the legislations and practices with
respect to Mediation procedure in different state that are the party to the convention and
thereby provide a scope of flexibility in order to achieve the primary objective of the
convention, i.e. to encourage mediation as a suitable method of dispute resolution in
International trade.
Thus, the convention provides the opportunity to use the settlement agreement both as a
‘sword’ and a ‘shield’.17 Since the settlement agreement can be used in order to seek relief
without having to seek consent from the other party, however, when one party claims that the
dispute has already been resolved, the same could be used as a defence against the relief
sought.
Article 4: Requirement for reliance on Settlement Agreement18

Article 4 of the Convention lays down the requirements that are to be fulfilled by the party
seeking to enforce the Settlement Agreement. The following information is required to be
submitted to a competent authority where relief is sought:
(a)The settlement agreement signed by the parties;
(b) Evidence that the settlement agreement resulted from mediation, such as: (i) The
mediator’s signature on the settlement agreement; (ii) A document signed by the mediator
indicating that the mediation was carried out; (iii) An attestation by the institution that
administered the mediation; or (iv) In the absence of (i), (ii) or (iii), any other evidence
acceptable to the competent authority.19
The above-mentioned requirements would help to substantiate and verify the claim of the
party seeking enforceability of the settlement agreement thereby seeking relief. However, the
scope of the convention is not limited by providing an exhaustive list of evidences that would
be deemed acceptable in order to enforce the settlement agreement, rather the scope is
expanded by away of article 4(b)(iv). The onus to determine the acceptability is left open to
the Competent Authority, therein taking into consideration unforeseeable contingencies and
circumstances.
17
Lucy Reed, ‘Ultima Thule: Prospects for International Commercial Mediation (NUS Centre for International
Law Working Paper 19/03 – January 2019)’, available at http://cil.nus.edu.sg/library/, at 13.
18
19
Ibid.
8
One of the possible drawbacks of the said provision20 is the discretion levied on the
competent authority to request translation of the settlement agreement if not in official
language of the party to the Convention. This may lead to unnecessary delay that may be
caused by such party to the convention, when used with the purpose to delay the proceedings.
Though the convention has made an exclusive provision for the attestation of the evidence in
order to establish that the settlement agreement has reached through mediation, the
convention is silent with respect to the attestation of other crucial requirements such as the
nature of dispute.21
Article 5: Grounds for refusing to grant relief

Article 5 of the Convention lays down the situations under which the competent authority
shall refuse to grant relief, when the party against whom the relief is sought furnishes proves
as laid down under Article 5.
Article 5(1)22 lays down the circumstances, on satisfaction of which, the competent authority
shall deny relief sought by the party.
Along with this, Article 5(2)23 provides for refusal of relief sought when the relief sought is
contrary to the public policy of the state against whom relief is sought by the other party or
the subject matter is incapable of settlement by mediation under the law of the party seeking
refusal to grant relief. This could be done so even at the option of the competent authority
suo moto.
20
Art.3, ibid.
21
Bruno Zeller, Leon Trakman, ‘Mediation and arbitration: the process of enforcement’ (2019) Uniform L.
Rev., available at https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unz020, at 30.
22
The competent authority of the Party to the Convention where relief is sought under article 4 may refuse to
grant relief at the request of the party against whom the relief is sought only if that party furnishes to the
competent authority proof that: (a) A party to the settlement agreement was under some incapacity; (b) The
settlement agreement sought to be relied upon: (i) Is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed
under the law to which the parties have validly subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law
deemed applicable by the competent authority of the Party to the Convention where relief is sought under
article 4; (ii) Is not binding, or is not final, according to its terms; or (iii) Has been subsequently modified; (c)
The obligations in the settlement agreement: (i) Have been performed; or (ii) Are not clear or comprehensible;
(d) Granting relief would be contrary to the terms of the settlement agreement; (e) There was a serious breach by
the mediator of standards applicable to the mediator or the mediation without which breach that party would not
have entered into the settlement agreement; or (f) There was a failure by the mediator to disclose to the parties
circumstances that raise justifiable doubts as to the mediator’s impartiality or independence and such failure to
disclose had a material impact or undue influence on a party without which failure that party would not have
entered into the settlement agreement.
23
The competent authority of the Party to the Convention where relief is sought under article 4 may also refuse
to grant relief if it finds that: (a) Granting relief would be contrary to the public policy of that Party; or (b) The
subject matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by mediation under the law of that Party.
9
The grounds for refusing relief laid down under Article 5 can be thus categorised into
‘Substantive Grounds’ wherein the settlement agreement has no legal standing due to the
incapacity of the parties or the settlement agreement is in itself invalid. Another group could
be with respect to the content of the settlement agreement wherein the relief can be refused
when the settlement agreement is not binding, the relief if granted would be at odds with the
terms of settlement agreement et cetera.24
The list laid down under Article 5 can be analysed as permissive in nature as well as
exhaustive. Permissive, since the convention has adopted a flexible approach as to when the
party signatory to the convention, seeks relief under its domestic law, the grounds for refusal
can be reduced whereas, exhaustive, as the enforcement cannot be denied for grounds that are
not listed in Article 5, when comes to multi-national dispute resolution.25
The extensive list laid down in the Convention would facilitate effective redressal to the
petition seeking refusal to the grant relief since it contains all possible breach or illegality due
to which the relief sought could be rejected.
The provision is similar to that of the New York Convention on the Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards to a great extent as New York Convention also
recognises the incapacity to enter into an agreement, invalidity of the agreement as the
grounds to refuse the relief sought for the arbitration agreements.26
Article 8: Reservations27
In order to make the convention wholesome and devoid of any encroaching provisions, the
convention has allowed ‘Reservations’ to be made in accordance with Article 8.28
24
Y Edna Sussman, ‘The Singapore Convention. Promoting the Enforcement and Recognition of International
Settlement Agreements’ (2018/3) ICC Dispute Resolution Bulletin.
25
Bruno Zeller, Leon Trakman, ‘Mediation and arbitration: the process of enforcement’ (2019) Uniform L.
Rev., available at https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unz020
26
Art. V(I)(a) and Art. V(I)(e), United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards (New York, 10 June 1958). http://www.newyorkconvention.org/english.
27
28
A Party to the Convention may declare that: (a) It shall not apply this Convention to settlement agreements to
which it is a party, or to which any governmental agencies or any person acting on behalf of a governmental
agency is a party, to the extent specified in the declaration; (b) It shall apply this Convention only to the extent
that the parties to the settlement agreement have agreed to the application of the Convention. 2. No reservations
are permitted except those expressly authorized in this article. 3. Reservations may be made by a Party to the
Convention at any time. Reservations made at the time of signature shall be subject to confirmation upon
ratification, acceptance or approval. Such reservations shall take effect simultaneously with the entry into force
8 of this Convention in respect of the Party to the Convention concerned. Reservations made at the time of
ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto, or at the time of making a
declaration under article 13 shall take effect simultaneously with the entry into force of this Convention in
respect of the Party to the Convention concerned. Reservations deposited after the entry into force of the
Convention for that Party to the Convention shall take effect six months after the date of the deposit. 4.
10
The following article allows the party to the convention to make reservation up to a certain
extent and as allowed under the Convention thereby allowing the party to not apply the
settlement agreement to the extent specified in the declaration.
The following article is controversial and vague to the extent that it applies the convention to
the governmental agencies or person representing government agencies as well as provide for
an opt-in requirement. With respect to the first issue, it could be understood that the signatory
to the convention shall have the discretion to hold reservations with respect to the application
of the convention wherein the government agency or a person representing the government
agency forms the party of the settlement agreement. Whereas, with respect to the second
issue, the party to the convention shall have the discretion to determine the extent of
applicability of the convention to the settlement agreement.
Though this provision could be seen as a necessity to a certain extent as exclusion of the
government agencies from the scope of the convention as the government agencies can also
engage in commercial activities and a blanket exclusion would prove detrimental to the
interest and protection of the parties engaging with the government agencies.
Conclusion and Comments:

In laymen’s language, Mediation could be understood as the amicable resolution of a dispute
arising among parties to an agreement/contract, the resolution of which is facilitated by a
neutral third party.
In the International Trade scenario, Mediation is seldom opted as a preferred mode of Dispute
Resolution and the Singapore Mediation Convention is an instrument which was much
needed in order to promote and encourage mediation as a preferred method of dispute
resolution. The Singapore Convention has undoubtedly paved way for the enforcement of
Multi-National Settlement Agreement entered into through Mediation.
According to the findings of a survey, 29 97% of the respondents still preferred Arbitration as
the appropriate method of Dispute Resolution for commercial dispute arising in International
scenario. The reason for the same could be deduced from the fact that the New York
Convention has established an enforcing mechanism for arbitration awards for commercial
disputes. However, Arbitration suffers from the drawback of not being cost efficient leading
to high cost of Arbitration.
Reservations and their confirmations shall be deposited with the depositary. 5. Any Party to the Convention that
makes a reservation under this Convention may withdraw it at any time. Such withdrawals are to be deposited
with the depositary, and shall take effect six months after deposit.
29
2018 International Arbitration Survey: The Evolution of International Arbitration, School of International
Arbitration at Queen Mary University of London in partnership with White & Case LLP,
http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/media/arbitration/docs/2018-International-Arbitration-Survey-report.pdf.
11
Mediation at International Level encompassing commercial dispute could prove

advantageous due to manifold reasons, such as, economically feasible, simple procedural
requirement, consensus-based et cetera.
The Singapore Convention provides an opportunity to the parties to the convention to settle
the commercial dispute in a limited time frame and in an amicable manner, thereby,
protecting the interests of the aggrieved party. Since, earlier due to the lack of a convention or
international legislation, enforcing and regulating Settlement Agreements could not be
entered into through Mediation and thus proved disadvantageous to the parties to the
agreement.
The Singapore Mediation Convention lays down an effective, efficient, simple and
appropriate method for enforcing Mediation mechanism for dispute resolution.
This could be further substantiated from the above explained and analysed key provisions of
the Convention, which in turn has highlighted the significance that the convention shall have
in cross-border trade dispute resolution thereby ensuring economic harmony.
However, the author would like to place certain observations and suggestions in a nutshell:
Observations:
 The convention is a progressive step towards establishing Mediation as a preferred
mode of Dispute Resolution with respect to Commercial Dispute arising in cross-
border trade.
 The Singapore Mediation Convention is greatly influence by the New York
Convention on Arbitration, and the same has been pointed out in the above
explanation of various key provisions.
Suggestions:
 The Convention should have made the resorting to the procedure mandatory, rather
than being left to be voluntary at the discretion of the party to the settlement
agreement.
 The convention should have defined as to what shall entail ‘Commercial Dispute’ in
order to avoid any ambiguities. Since an ambiguity with respect to this could prove
detrimental to the interest of the party to the settlement agreement.
 The convention should have explicitly laid down the characteristic feature of
mediation, i.e. ‘Unbiased Third Party’ for the effective implementation of the
Convention.
 The ‘Mediator’ should have been given adjudicatory power so as to reinforce the trust
of parties to enter into Agreement Settlement entered through Mediation.
12
References and Bibliography
Conventions:
 United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from

Mediation,2018.
 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards (New York, 10 June 1958). http://www.newyorkconvention.org/english.
 UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation with Guide to
Enactment and Use 2002.
https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/ml-conc/03-90953_Ebook.pdf.
Report:
 Report of Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) on the Work of its Sixty-fifth

Session, UNCITRAL, UN Doc. A/CN.9/896 (2016).
 Report of Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) on the Work of its Sixty-sixth
Session, UNCITRAL, Un Doc. A/CN.9/901 (2017).
Articles:
 Timothy Schnabel, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Framework for the

Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Mediated Settlements’ (2019) 19
Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 1-60, 11.
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol19/iss1/1.
 Bruno Zeller, Leon Trakman, ‘Mediation and arbitration: the process of enforcement’
(2019) Uniform L. Rev., available at https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unz020.
 Elisabetta Silvestri, The Singapore Convention On Mediated Settlement Agreements:
A New String To The Bow Of International Mediation?, 2019.
 Elisabetta Silvestri, ‘Too Much of a Good Thing: Alternative Dispute Resolution in
Italy’ (2017).
 Harmonising Trade Law to Enable Private Sector Regional Development
(UNCITRAL Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific, 2017).
13
 Lucy Reed, ‘Ultima Thule: Prospects for International Commercial Mediation (NUS
Centre for International Law Working Paper 19/03 – January 2019)’,
http://cil.nus.edu.sg/library/, at 13.
 Y Edna Sussman, ‘The Singapore Convention. Promoting the Enforcement and
Recognition of International Settlement Agreements’ ICC Dispute Resolution Bulletin
(2018/3).
 CHUA, E. (2019). The Singapore Convention on Mediation—A Brighter Future for
Asian Dispute Resolution. Asian Journal of International Law, 9(2), 195-205.
doi:10.1017/S2044251318000309
 Hasan Faraj Mehrabi, The Singapore Mediation Convention: a promising start, an
uncertain future, leiden law blog, Universiteit Leiden, 2019.
https://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/the-singapore-mediation-convention-a-promising-
start-an-uncertain-future.
 Antony Smith and Ellie Eastwood, Singapore Mediation Convention and its Impact
on the European Region, Beale & Co., 2020.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5ef21e0f-ee27-42c2-bc0a-
6b6dabefba1c.
14

Symbiosis Law School, Pune: Care Courage Competence Collaboration

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Symbiosis Law School, Pune: Care Courage Competence Collaboration

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

Care Courage Competence Collaboration

ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Name: Riya Gupta

Article 1: Scope of Application.......................................................................................................4

Need to explain and analyse key provisions:

These provisions are:

Article 1: Scope of Application4

cope of interpretation arises due to the ambiguity as to what shall be defined as a

The convention under Article 2 defines ‘International’, ‘Agreement in Writing’ and

Article 3: General Principles14

Article 4: Requirement for reliance on Settlement Agreement18

(a)The settlement agreement signed by the parties;

Article 5: Grounds for refusing to grant relief

Conclusion and Comments:

Mediation at International Level encompassing commercial dispute could prove

References and Bibliography

 United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from

 Report of Working Group II (Dispute Settlement) on the Work of its Sixty-fifth

 Timothy Schnabel, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Framework for the

You might also like