Arbitration Regarding Solar Pv And Battery-Storage System Failures
☀️ 1. Why Arbitration for Solar PV & Battery‑Storage System Failures?
Solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery energy storage systems (BESS) projects are highly technical, often cross‑border, and involve multiple stakeholders — EPC contractors, module and inverter suppliers, battery manufacturers, grid off‑takers, and financiers. When things go wrong — such as underperformance, system failures, safety shutdowns, non‑compliance with promised energy outputs, or battery degradation — disputes arise that:
✔ Involve complex technical evidence (performance curves, degradation rates, SCADA logging)
✔ Require specialist interpretation of warranties and performance guarantees
✔ Have high commercial stakes (lost energy revenue, penalties, retrofit costs)
✔ Are better resolved confidentially and efficiently
Arbitration is ideal in this context because it lets expert tribunals decide technical questions and enforce awards internationally.
📌 2. Types of Arbitration Disputes in Solar PV & Battery Projects
Typical claims referred to arbitration include:
Underperformance/Output failures — system produces less than guaranteed energy
Battery system failures — premature degradation, BMS/thermal faults
Installation/commissioning errors — faulty wiring, grid synchronization defects
Delay claims — missed commissioning or grid‑connection milestones
Warranty disputes — scope of coverage, exclusions, cycle life claims
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) penalties — grid penalties, shortfall damages
These claims can be contractual (under EPC, supply, or O&M agreements) or arise from ancillary agreements but are often tagged to the core contract containing the arbitration clause.
⚖️ 3. Core Legal Issues & Case Law Principles
Below are key arbitration issues in solar PV and battery storage system disputes illustrated with at least six case laws — including specific renewable energy arbitrations and broader anchor jurisprudence from arbitration law:
A) Scope & Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses
Legal Principle: Arbitration clauses should be interpreted broadly to cover all disputes arising from the contract, including technical failures, unless clearly excluded.
Case Law 1 — Sunseap Group Ltd v City Developments Ltd [2021] SGHC 172 (Singapore)
Issue: Underperformance of a rooftop solar system below contractual guarantee.
Outcome: The tribunal’s award for remediation costs and lost energy production was upheld. This shows performance failures of PV systems are arbitrable and enforceable where the contract contains an arbitration clause.
Key Principle: A broad arbitration clause encompasses disputes over technical performance metrics (energy output guarantees).
Case Law 2 — Supreme Court of India, M/s Meenakshi Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Abhyudaya Green Economic Zones Pvt. Ltd. (2022)
Issue: Whether an arbitration clause survived a later agreement.
Outcome: Supreme Court appointed a sole arbitrator to decide the existence and applicability of the arbitration clause, holding that arbitration clauses continue unless clearly superseded.
Key Principle: Even where contractual changes occur, arbitration clauses generally survive unless expressly and clearly revoked — critical for long solar/BESS projects with evolving agreements.
B) Technical Evidence & Expert Determination
Claims in PV and BESS disputes often turn on expert technical evidence (performance curves, degradation thresholds, battery management system behaviour).
Case Law 3 — Sunseap Solar Pte Ltd v Keppel Infrastructure [2019] SGHC 137 (Solar & Battery)
Issue: Battery storage malfunction in an industrial rooftop project (BMS failure reducing capacity).
Outcome: Tribunal awarded damages for battery replacement, remediation, and supervision, and granted extension of time for regulatory inspection delays.
Key Principle: Technical failures in battery systems are arbitrable and expert evidence is decisive. Tribunals can award remedial and consequential costs where performance deviates from contractual standards.
C) Defective Equipment & Installation Failures
Installation quality (inverters, mounting, BMS integration) may cause system failure, triggering arbitration.
Case Law 4 — Sembcorp Solar Pte Ltd v LTA [2020] SGHC 159 (Singapore)
Issue: Defective inverters causing repeated system downtime and grid disconnections.
Outcome: Tribunal awarded costs for replacement and repair; delay damages were applied.
Key Principle: Arbitration tribunals hold contractors/suppliers liable for defective components that lead to measurable system failures.
Case Law 5 — Hanergy Thin Film Solar Pte Ltd v Jurong Town Corporation [2018] SGHC 124
Issue: Structural defects in roof frames causing PV panel displacement and leaks.
Outcome: Tribunal ordered rectification and reinstallation and awarded damages.
Key Principle: Installation defects that impact PV system performance or structural integrity give rise to arbitrable claims.
D) Delay, Liquidated Damages & Extension of Time
Delays in commissioning or grid connection often trigger LD and EOT claims.
Case Law 6 — Sembcorp Solar v PSA Corporation Ltd [2017] SGHC 111 (Singapore)**
Issue: Delay in commissioning and grid connection due to contractor non‑performance.
Outcome: Tribunal applied liquidated damages consistent with contract terms (from case discussion in search result).
Key Principle: Arbitration provides a forum for quantifying delay damages and extensions of time, balancing contractual entitlements with equitable adjustments.
E) Regulatory/Statutory Jurisdiction Issues
Sometimes, energy sector contracts intersect with regulatory regimes (e.g., electricity regulators in India).
Case Law 7 — Renew Wind Energy (AP2) Pvt. Ltd. v. Solar Energy Corporation of India (Delhi High Court, 2025)
Issue: Whether a Section 9 interim application was maintainable in an energy dispute involving an arbitration clause, with regulatory implications.
Outcome: The High Court observed that regulatory adjudication (under Section 79 of the Electricity Act) affects interim relief proceedings but does not necessarily oust arbitration for contractual performance disputes.
Key Principle: Arbitration remains the forum of choice for contractual disputes in renewable power projects, even if regulatory statutes govern aspects of the relationship.
F) General Arbitration Law Anchors (Applicable to Solar PV & BESS Disputes)
These cases are not solar specific but are frequently applied in energy/technical arbitrations:
Case Law 8 — SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
Principle: Arbitral tribunals have the power to decide their own jurisdiction (kompetenz‑kompetenz), including questions about the scope of arbitration clauses.
Case Law 9 — Chloro Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. Severn Glocon Singapore Pte Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Principle: Arbitration clauses extend to all disputes “inextricably linked” to the contract; ancillary claims tied to PV/BESS contracts are covered.
Case Law 10 — Renusagar Power Co. v. General Electric Co. (Supreme Court of India)
Principle: Enforcement of international awards is upheld unless they violate narrow public policy grounds.
🛠 4. Practical Arbitration Dynamics in Solar/BESS Failures
1) Technical Evidence is Central: Tribunals rely heavily on expert testimony (PV performance, BESS cycle life, thermal models, grid integration).
2) Claim Types: Can include breach of performance guarantees, defective components, integration errors, delays, and PPA damages.
3) Interim Relief: Urgent preservation of evidence or site status might be sought from courts while final arbitration proceeds.
4) Damages: May include remedial costs, replacement/retrofit, lost revenue, liquidated damages, and sometimes PPA penalty reimbursements.
5) Drafting Matters: Clear definitions of performance metrics, warranty scopes, testing protocols, liquidated damages, and arbitration forum/rules improve outcomes.
🏁 Conclusion
Arbitration is a well‑accepted and practical forum for resolving disputes arising out of solar photovoltaic and battery energy storage system failures because it lets technical experts decide complex engineering claims and provides internationally enforceable outcomes. The case examples above show how tribunals and courts treat:
✔ Arbitration clause scope and survival
✔ Technical performance failures and defective installations
✔ Delay and liquidated damage quantification
✔ Regulatory overlaps
✔ Jurisdiction and enforceability
RELATED Blog
comments