Lawyers

Singapore
T: +65 6230 3839
F: +65 6230 3899
Add to Outlook
Yu-Jin Tay
Counsel

Education
Board of Legal Education, Postgraduate Practical Law Course, Singapore, 2000
Public Service Commission, Overseas Merit Scholar, 1993–1999
Inns of Court School of Law, London, Bar Vocational Course, 1998
University College London, LL.M. Corporate and Commercial Law, 1997
University College London, LL.B. (Hons), 1996

PRACTICE
Mr. Tay is Counsel in Shearman & Sterling’s International Arbitration Group with responsibility for leading the international arbitration practice in Asia. Presently based in Singapore, he has practised international arbitration in Paris, London and Washington, DC. He specialises in international arbitrations arising from M&A, joint venture, oil and gas, construction and general commercial disputes. He also has expertise in representing investors and governments in investment treaty arbitrations.

Before joining Shearman & Sterling, Mr. Tay trained as a barrister at Fountain Court Chambers, a leading commercial set in London. As a returning Singapore Public Service Commission Scholar, he also served with the Ministry of Defence as a military prosecutor and legal counsel.

Mr. Tay appears in the 2011 edition of the Global Arbitration Review’s “45 under 45”, a global survey of top arbitration lawyers under 45. Since 2010, Mr. Tay has also been listed in GAR’s International Who’s Who of Commercial Arbitration, in which he is described as having “impressed clients” with “persuasive advocacy on critical legal points that … made a real difference to the result.” Chambers describes Mr. Tay as the “highly regarded new Asia practice head”, who is “well ahead of the game”, “incisive and analytical in his approach” and “a great lawyer with a lot of experience both inside and outside Asia.” The Asia arbitration team is also lauded for having “abundant experience” and being “great value for money.” Since 2006, Mr. Tay has also been listed in the Euromoney Guide to the World’s Leading Experts in Commercial Arbitration and other legal directories including The Legal 500.

In addition to acting as counsel, Mr. Tay sits as an arbitrator and has received appointments in ICC and SIAC arbitrations. He is a member of the SIAC, KCAB and KLRCA panels of arbitrators. He speaks regularly at international conferences on investment treaty arbitration and arbitration law and practice. He has also been commissioned by international development agencies to conduct arbitration training and capacity-building for governments in Asia.

Mr. Tay is a Council Member and Fellow of the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators. He chairs or serves on various committees of the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators or other international arbitration groups. From 2002-2010, he was the first Regional Representative for Asia in the LCIA’s Young International Arbitration Group (YIAG). He is a member of various international bar associations including the Australasian Forum for International Arbitration (AFIA), International Arbitration Institute (IAI), International Bar Association (IBA) and the Inter-Pacific Bar Association (IPBA).

Experience
Recent or pending arbitrations in which Mr. Tay has had experience include the representation of:
  • Two Asian oil and gas companies as Respondents in pending ad hoc arbitrations in London and Geneva. The disputes arise in connection with a sale and purchase agreement and a joint operating agreement; one is governed by English law and the other by Sudan law. Approximately USD 100 million is in dispute.
  • A North Asian retailer as respondent in a potential LCIA arbitration in Hong Kong against an American retailer. The dispute arises in relation to price adjustment and representation and warranty claims brought by the claimant in relation to its acquisition of the respondent’s assets in China.
  • A prominent French global fashion label against an Asian textile company in an ad hoc arbitration in Singapore. The dispute arose in connection with trademark registration in breach of agreement between the parties. A successful outcome was achieved for our clients.
  • Four Middle Eastern and Asian companies as respondents in ICC arbitration in Singapore against 12 Asian claimants. The dispute concerned a shareholders’ agreement. Over US$5 billion was in dispute and the dispute was subject to Korean law. Two of our clients successfully objected to jurisdiction. All claims against them were dismissed and over US$2 million in costs were awarded to our clients. Under the terms of the award on the merits, our other two clients would sell their shares to the Claimants, which would give our clients a return on their investment of over 300 percent, all damages claims brought against our clients were dismissed, and each party bore their own costs.
  • A major Indian listed company and its affiliate in joint venture and related disputes governed respectively by Singapore, English and New York laws, subject to SIAC arbitration in Singapore and litigation in a number of jurisdictions. A successful comprehensive settlement and restructuring of the joint venture was achieved.
  • A major North Asian corporation as respondent in an ICC arbitration in Korea against a claim by a European contractor under various agreements. The dispute concerned tax liability under the agreements. The amount at stake was approximately US$30 million. The dispute was subject to Korean law. We achieved a complete dismissal of claims against the respondent and full recovery of all legal and arbitration-related costs.
  • A Malaysian company owned by British investors in ICSID proceedings to annul an award rendered in favour of the Government of Malaysia in a dispute arising out of a high profile marine historical salvage project. We achieved a successful annulment of the ICSID award in this landmark case.
  • An English listed industrial conglomerate and its Dutch affiliate as respondents and counterclaimant in an ICC arbitration in Zurich arising out of a long-standing joint venture in Korea. The dispute arose under a Joint Venture Agreement that is subject to Korean law. The amount in dispute was US$50 million. A successful settlement was achieved.
  • An Asia-Pacific life insurance company as respondent in an ICC arbitration in New York against a Korean government entity. The dispute arose out of the sale of a Korean life insurance company including our client. The applicable law was Korean and the amount at stake was US$2 billion.
  • American investors as claimants in an ICSID arbitration against a Middle Eastern state. The US$250 million dispute concerned unfair treatment and expropriation of the investors’ textile investments by the state in violation of a bilateral investment treaty. We continue to represent the same investors in ICSID annulment proceedings against the Middle Eastern state.
  • A Bangladesh power plant operator as claimant in three UNCITRAL arbitrations in Singapore, administered by the SIAC, against a Bangladeshi state-owned power company. The disputes are governed by English law and arise in connection with operation and maintenance agreements for two combined cycle power plants in Bangladesh. A successful award for US$20 million (with full recovery of costs) was obtained in the first arbitration. The second and third arbitrations are pending.
  • A Cyprus-based investor as claimant in an Energy Charter Treaty arbitration against an Eastern European state. The US$300 million dispute arose from the claimant’s investment in a private oil refinery.
  • An American investor and its two Korean affiliates as claimants in an ICC arbitration in Hong Kong against a leading Korean steelmaker. The US$500 million dispute was governed by Korean law and concerned the respondent’s failure to perform an agreement to sell its assets to the claimants.
  • A Korean subsidiary of a US telecommunications company as claimant in an ICC arbitration in San Francisco against three Korean defendants arising out of the acquisition by our client of telecommunications-related assets from the defendants. US$10 million was in dispute.
  • A Venezuelan consortium as respondent in a series of claims brought over a contract to build a petroleum upgrader. The ICC arbitration was governed by New York law and involved over US$690 million in claims arising in connection with the national Venezuelan oil strike of 2002-03. A favourable settlement was achieved.
  • An Asian state entity as claimant against a group of leading European defence companies in an ICC arbitration in Paris. The dispute arose from a defence procurement contract and involved claims in excess of US$550 million. The governing law was French law and the arbitration was in English and French.
  • A French oil company and investment consortium as claimants against an Eastern European state in an UNCITRAL arbitration and related proceedings in Stockholm. The dispute concerned violations of an oil production sharing agreement and the governing law was Russian law.
  • A leading French cement company as claimant against a Philippine cement producer in a construction dispute relating to a US$336 million cement manufacturing plant in the Philippines. Philippine law governed the dispute and the arbitration was conducted in Singapore under ICC Rules.
  • A Korean project company in disputes with construction contractors subject to ICC arbitration in Singapore. The disputes arose out of the construction of a combined cycle power plant in the Philippines and concerned issues including delay, disruption and extra work claims. New York law governed the dispute.
  • A Southeast Asian owner in ICC and SIAC arbitrations in Singapore against Korean contractors. The disputes concerned delay in the construction of a commercial tower block in Manila and the financing arrangements for the project. Philippine law governed and the language of the arbitration was English.
  • A Chinese-US manufacturing joint venture as claimant in an ICC arbitration in Hong Kong against a US distributor. The dispute concerned defective performance by the respondent of a distribution contract.

Internal Investigations Experience
  • Mr. Tay’s internal investigations experience includes the representation of a leading telecommunications provider in one of the world’s largest post-closing corporate investigations into alleged US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations by a joint venture partner. The investigation covered 2o countries in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa.

Pro Bono Experience
  • Mr. Tay is active in international pro bono matters. He has been seconded to the Office of the Prosecutor at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (UNICTR) and assisted in its prosecution of genocide and crimes against humanity. He has drafted an amicus brief for the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria — a landmark decision by the Grand Chamber of the ECHR which affirmed in substantial part its first ever finding of racial discrimination in breach of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Mr. Tay’s pro bono legal experience also includes the successful representation of indigent Palestinians seeking political asylum in the United States. More recently, Mr. Tay represented a Rwandan national in his asylum application before the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Hong Kong. Mr. Tay also provides skills training and support for programmes sponsored by International Bridges to Justice.


Bar Admissions/Qualifications
Barrister-at-Law, Gray’s Inn, London
Solicitor, England and Wales
Advocate and Solicitor, Supreme Court of Singapore


Languages
English
Mandarin