Read the full judgment text of CACV 272/2015 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 29 March 2017 before Hon Lam VP, Kwan JA and Lok J.
Arbitration — Enforcement of Singapore arbitration awards in Hong Kong — Extension of time to apply to set aside enforcement orders — Proper test for extension of time under New York Convention — Whether non-set aside of award by seat court is relevant factor — Requirement for original arbitration agreement or certified copy under s 43 Arbitration Ordinance — Court of Appeal dismissed application for leave to appeal to CFA against refusal to extend time. The Court examined established case law including The Decurion and Terna Bahrain on extension of time, affirming the application of the latter test as consistent with general principles and emphasising the importance of finality in arbitration. It held the validity of the awards, as maintained by the seat court, was a relevant factor when considering extension. Regarding s 43, the Court followed the two-stage approach of Dardana Ltd v Yukos Oil Company, distinguishing divergent Australian authority. The Court found no arguable error or exceptional circumstances warranting leave to appeal and awarded costs to the applicants. The application for leave was refused.
Legal issues: Proper test for extension of time to resist enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention · Relevance of the fact that the award has not been set aside by the seat court when considering extension of time · Proper test for requiring original arbitration agreement or duly certified copy under s 43 of the Arbitration Ordinance for award enforcement
Outcome: Dismissal of First Media’s application for leave to appeal with costs awarded to Astro
Cited by 4 cases · Cites 1 case