Special Counsel Lukas Lim contributed a case report, where in The “Yangtze Harmony” [2026] SGHC 3, the Singapore High Court held that it could lift a stay previously granted in favour of London-seated arbitration to allow the claimant to enter judgment in rem in support of two in personam arbitral awards, enabling enforcement against the sale proceeds of an arrested vessel paid into court.

Reproduced from Practical Law with the permission of the publishers. For further information, visit www.practicallaw.com.

The Singapore High Court has held that it could lift a stay previously granted in favour of London-seated arbitration to allow the claimant to enter judgment in rem (against a thing) in support of two in personam (against a person) arbitral awards.

The claimant commenced an admiralty in rem action and arrested the vessel “Yangtze Harmony” as security for towage-related claims. As the towage contract contained a London arbitration clause, the in rem proceedings were stayed in favour of arbitration, while preserving the vessel as security.

With the vessel under arrest, the claimant obtained leave for a sale pending arbitration. The vessel was judicially sold, and the balance sale proceeds remained in court pending the outcome of the arbitration.

The claimant subsequently obtained two in personam arbitral awards against the vessel's charterer and took steps to enforce the award as a court judgment, but the defendant did not comply. The claimant's practical difficulty was that the vessel (now the sale proceeds) sat in court within a stayed in rem action. It therefore applied to lift the stay and to enter judgment in rem in terms of the awards so the proceeds could be applied towards satisfaction of the two awards.

The court granted the application, holding that it had the power to lift the stay and allow the in rem action to proceed to judgment to enforce the in personam awards. Specifically:

• When staying in rem proceedings in favour of arbitration, the court is empowered under section 7 of the International Arbitration Act (IAA) to order the arrested ship (or equivalent security) to be retained so that the claimant is not left with an unenforceable award, in personam or otherwise.
• If the award debtor fails to satisfy the award, the claimant can apply to remove the stay and proceed to judgment in rem to enforce the award against the retained security. This second limb, although not spelt out in section 7 of the IAA, was deemed by the court as necessary to give practical effect to the first limb.

The case provides a clear route for practitioners and parties in shipping disputes, particularly when arbitral awards rendered against named defendants in personam are sought to be enforced in admiralty actions in rem against ships.

Case:The "Yangtze Harmony" [2026] SGHC 3 (7 January 2026) (S Mohan J).