Singapore Court of Appeal Maintains Injunction in KBP Biosciences and Novo Nordisk Arbitration
Stories are grouped across languages, rewritten into a fixed editorial format, and linked to original sources. How we report.
TL;DR
- Singapore Court of Appeal maintained temporary injunction against KBP Biosciences and Dr. Huang.
- No finding of fraud or dishonesty was made by the Court of Appeal.
- Arbitration proceedings between KBP Biosciences and Novo Nordisk remain ongoing.
- Novo Nordisk's claims and KBP's defenses will be decided by the arbitral tribunal.
Overview
On May 21, 2026, KBP Biosciences announced that the Singapore Court of Appeal upheld a temporary injunction against the company and its founder, Dr. Huang Zhenhua, pending the outcome of arbitration proceedings with Novo Nordisk. The dispute centers on the development and rights related to the drug ocedurenone. The Court of Appeal clarified that no finding of fraud or dishonesty had been made against KBP or Dr. Huang and that substantive issues would be determined through arbitration.
What Happened
KBP Biosciences and Novo Nordisk are involved in arbitration over issues relating to the development and acquisition of the drug ocedurenone.
Novo Nordisk initiated claims of fraud against KBP and Dr. Huang; however, the Singapore Court of Appeal stated there was no finding of fraud or dishonesty against the parties at this stage.
The Court of Appeal maintained a temporary injunction to preserve the status quo while the arbitration proceeds, under Section 12A of Singapore's International Arbitration Act.
The court confirmed that Novo Nordisk received and had access to KBP's raw clinical trial data.
KBP Biosciences disputes Novo Nordisk's decision to stop developing ocedurenone and maintains that this cessation was unjustified.
Context
The dispute arises from Novo Nordisk's acquisition process and subsequent decision to terminate development of ocedurenone, a drug candidate developed by KBP Biosciences.
Each party has initiated arbitration proceedings, and the case is still ongoing before an arbitral tribunal. The Singapore courts are involved only to the extent of issuing interim relief, not to decide the substance of the dispute.
Why It Matters
- The decision clarifies the limited role of Singapore courts during arbitration, emphasizing that substantive determinations remain with the arbitral tribunal.
- The case demonstrates the application of interim remedies under Singapore's International Arbitration Act and illustrates procedural safeguards in high-value pharmaceutical disputes.