Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

The Effect of Choice of Court Agreements on Third Parties: Lecture by Professor Yeo Tiong Min

April 11, 2022/1 Comment/in News/by Adeline Chong
image_pdfimage_print

The Yong Pung How Professorship of Law Lecture 2022 will be held online on Wednesday 25 May 2022 at 5:00 to 6:30pm Singapore time. The speaker, Professor Yeo Tiong Min, SC (Hon), who holds the Yong Pung How Professorship of Law chair at the Singapore Management University, will speak on ‘ The Effect of Choice of Court Agreements on Third Parties’. The synopsis for the talk is as follows:

“The effect of choice of court agreements on the exercise of jurisdiction of the Singapore court between contracting parties at common law has received clarification in Singapore law in recent years. The position is also clear under the SICC Rules and the Choice of Court Agreements Act. The effect on third parties is less clear. In this lecture, the effect of choice of court agreements on the position of third parties under the legal regimes above will be considered, from the perspective of both conflict of laws and the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act in domestic Singapore law.”

Attendance at the webinar is complimentary. More information and the link to register can be found here.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Adeline Chong https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Adeline Chong2022-04-11 06:37:572022-04-11 06:37:57The Effect of Choice of Court Agreements on Third Parties: Lecture by Professor Yeo Tiong Min
1 reply
  1. John Coyle says:
    April 13, 2022 at 12:29 pm

    This looks to be a very interesting talk! I recently published a paper that surveys the case law in the United States with respect to this question. It’s available here:

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3846436

    The very short version is that whether choice-of-court clauses bind non-signatories depends on who, exactly, is invoking the clause and for what purpose. It’s one thing when a third party are seeking to take advantage of the clause. It’s quite another when a contracting party is seeking to enforce the clause against a third party without its consent.

Comments are closed.

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Private International Law and European Society August 4, 2026
  • The New Zealand Supreme Court’s judgment in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley on anti-enforcement relief August 3, 2026
  • Beyond Domicile: The BHP Litigation and the Functional Interconnection of Public and Private International Law August 3, 2026
  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
Link to: EFFORTS Questionnaire on Digitalization of Civil Procedures Relating to Cross-Border Enforcement Link to: EFFORTS Questionnaire on Digitalization of Civil Procedures Relating to Cross-Border Enforcement EFFORTS Questionnaire on Digitalization of Civil Procedures Relating to Cross-Border... Link to: Online Seminar BEUC Judges & Collective Redress Link to: Online Seminar BEUC Judges & Collective Redress Online Seminar BEUC Judges & Collective Redress
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top