1 The plaintiff and the defendant were the respondent and claimant respectively in Singapore International Arbitration Centre ("SIAC") Case No 085 of 2018 (the "arbitration proceedings"). In the arbitration proceedings, the defendant claimed damages in respect of the plaintiff's refusal to pay for consultancy services provided by the defendant in relation to the following:
(a) the acquisition of shares by the plaintiff in [X Co], an operator of oil fields (the "X Opportunity"); and
(b) a collaboration between the plaintiff and [Y Co], an integrated energy company (the "Y Opportunity").
2 The arbitration tribunal (the "Tribunal") issued its Final Award on 25 September 2020 ("Award"). The Tribunal awarded the defendant the sum of US$5,066,106.86 with interest and costs in respect of its claim in relation to the X Opportunity but dismissed the defendant's claim in relation to the Y Opportunity.
3 In these proceedings, the plaintiff applied to set aside the Award relating to the X Opportunity. The defendant did not challenge the Tribunal's dismissal of its claim in relation to the Y Opportunity.
4 I set aside the Award relating to the X Opportunity on the ground that the Tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction, pursuant to Article 34(2)(a)(iii) of the Model Law read with ss 3 and 24(b) of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) ("IAA"). The defendant has appealed against my decision.