Read the full judgment text of HCCT 39/2014 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 19 June 2015 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration — Arbitration Award — Application to set aside — Alleged inability to present case — Refusal of Arbitrator to allow witness statements and evidence — Case management discretion — Serious breach of due process required — No material prejudice established. The parties entered into a share transfer agreement with a buyback clause conditional on company listing failure. After listing did not occur, dispute arose over buyback and payment terms leading to arbitration. The Arbitrator ruled the arbitration on documents only, refusing P’s request to adduce witness evidence. P challenged the Arbitrator’s partiality and subsequently sought to set aside the Award on grounds of being unable to present evidence. Applying Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v Pacific China Holdings Ltd (in liq), the Court held that the Arbitrator had properly exercised case management powers and no serious breach undermining due process was established. P failed to particularise evidence or show material prejudice affecting the Award’s outcome. Application was dismissed and costs awarded to S on indemnity basis.
Legal issues: Whether the Award should be set aside for inability to present case
Outcome: Application to set aside the arbitral Award dismissed; P ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis