Read the full judgment text of HCCT 13/2015 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 15 September 2015 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration enforcement — application to set aside enforcement order — procedural requirements under O73 r10 (6) & (6A) — importance of timeliness and supporting affidavit — abuse of process for late and unsupported summons — arbitration awards under Cap 341 enforced mechanically unless structural integrity breached — prior setting-aside application rejected — no merit to new grounds, including alleged failure of 3rd Respondent's participation — duty of good faith in arbitration — delaying tactics treated as abuse — court enforces 2nd and 3rd Arbitration Awards by orders dated 17 June 2015 — Respondents’ application dismissed and struck out with indemnity costs. Background: Parties entered into a LOI dated 12 April 2006 for share transactions involving Mainland and Hong Kong companies. Arbitration initiated in 2010 led to awards favoring Applicant's claim for validity of LOI and specific performance. Respondents failed to set aside 2nd Award previously and raised new challenges to enforcement order. Court confirms strict procedural compliance for setting aside enforcement order including requirement for affidavit and compliance with limitation period. Court refuses to review merits beyond structural due process. Respondents’ grounds found unmeritorious and applications considered abuse. Orders for costs made accordingly.
Legal issues: Requirements under O73 r10 for setting aside enforcement order · Merits of grounds to set aside enforcement order based on alleged invalidity of awards · Duty of good faith and abuse of process in arbitration enforcement proceedings
Outcome: The Respondents’ summons to set aside the enforcement order was dismissed and struck out.
Cited by 14 cases · Cites 1 case