Law governing the arbitrability: Faultlines in the singapore court of appeal’s composite approach in mittal case

Different states have different rules on arbitrability. While a dispute might be considered as arbitrable in one jurisdiction, it might not be the case in another. This poses challenge in cases where a dispute is connected to various jurisdictions with conflicting rules on arbitrability. Therefore, in an international arbitration, it becomes important to determine which jurisdictional rules govern the question of arbitrability. Some courts apply the law of the seat; others adopt ‘composite approach’ of applying both law of the seat and that of the arbitration agreement. However, the law of the place of enforcement is particularly disregarded especially at the pre-award stage. Based on the recent example of the Mittal case, this article argues against the application of one-size-fits-all approach and proposes the adoption of a comprehensive approach for determining the governing law of arbitrability which is inclusive of law of place of enforcement in certain kinds of cases.