With extensive experience across London, New York, Dubai and now Singapore, Sapna Jhangiani KC has joined London's prestigious Blackstone Chambers. As Singapore's first female lawyer to be appointed an English silk and a part-time judge of the Court of Appeal of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts, Jhangiani believes today’s global market calls for versatile legal professionals who can navigate various forms of commercial dispute resolution.
ALB: Given your unique position as a Singapore-based silk joining London’s Blackstone Chambers, how do you envision your role in strengthening the set's international arbitration practice in Asia?
Sapna Jhangiani KC: Blackstone Chambers already has a significant reputation internationally, in arbitration and more widely across its key practice areas of commercial law, public law, financial services, competition, public international, employment and sport. This reputation is particularly strong in Hong Kong, where members of Chambers appear regularly in the Court of Final Appeal, as well as in Dubai and India, with Harish Salve KC, one of Blackstone's most prominent members. I am confident that adding a Singapore-based silk to its existing roster of counsel who work in this region will help expand Blackstone's profile here, and I am especially looking forward to working with Blackstone's brilliant juniors on arbitration matters, wherever they are seated.
ALB: Having worked in various jurisdictions, including London, New York, Dubai, and Singapore, how do you see the harmonisation of international arbitration practices evolving, particularly in light of increasing cross-border disputes?
Jhangiani: In international arbitration, there is always a fundamental tension between harmonising global practices, and retaining flexibility, so that each arbitration can be tailored to the dispute at hand. As cross-border disputes have increased, there has been a standardisation of many procedures through “soft law” guidelines embodying best practice, and this has been a positive development. I hope that we will continue to straddle the line between harmonisation and bespoke procedures, bearing in mind that when procedures become too formulaic, this can add to time and costs. The biggest complaints of arbitration users are that it takes too long and is too expensive. We must never lose sight of the users' perspective in the process.
ALB: With your recent appointment as a part-time judge of the DIFC Courts' Court of Appeal, what emerging trends do you anticipate in disputes involving Middle Eastern jurisdictions and their interaction with Asian financial centres?
Jhangiani: I have been based in Asia (first Dubai, and then Singapore) for almost 20 years. In that time, I have observed a significant increase in cross-border disputes between the Middle East and Asian financial centres. I have no doubt that trend will continue.
Another trend to watch is the emergence and growth of international commercial courts in both Middle Eastern and Asian financial centres. When I moved to Dubai from London in 2006, the DIFC Courts had just started operations, enabling me to develop a DIFC litigation practice alongside my arbitration work. The Court quickly grew in size and stature to become a leading commercial court in the world, serving as inspiration for the establishment of new international commercial courts in different jurisdictions. Commercial users may prefer litigation to arbitration in several instances – for example, because of the availability of an appeal mechanism in litigation – and we must cater to that demand.
ALB: Looking ahead, what trends or developments do you foresee in arbitration practices in Asia over the next few years?
Jhangiani: There are two main trends I would highlight. Firstly – and obviously – there will be an increasing use of technology across all forms of commercial dispute resolution, including arbitration. Secondly – and crucially – data shows that business users want more dispute prevention tools, and more dexterity across dispute resolution options. Allowing flexibility across different options may give parties the best chance of a negotiated settlement, alongside an opportunity to maintain their business relationships, which can be incredibly important in the Asian context.
I was called to the Singapore Bar in 2019 so that I could offer both litigation and arbitration advocacy services to my Asian clients, and I also offer specialised mediation advocacy. The latter requires a specific skill set, but one which I foresee will become critical for commercial disputes lawyers in the years to come. Alongside my thriving counsel practice, I sit as an arbitrator, mediator and part-time commercial court judge, and I also offer neutral evaluations – all these roles require different, albeit overlapping, skill sets.
It is unusual to have such a broad practice, but my firm view is that the need of the hour is the “renaissance” lawyer who can provide dexterity and strength across all forms of commercial dispute resolution, with multiple skill sets, and deep experience in fighting cases, facilitating settlements, and achieving or determining and achieving a fair resolution of a dispute. What users want is rapidly changing in an evolving global market, and we must be nimble, and prepared to respond to the needs of those we serve.
