Read the full judgment text of HCCT 35/2019, HCCT 36/2019 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 23 April 2020 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration — Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards — Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) — Hadkinson Order — Contempt of Court — Asset Disclosure — Security for Enforcement — Tribunal Composition — CIETAC Arbitration Rules 2012 — Article 27(3) — Arbitration Clause Modification — Stay of Enforcement Proceedings. The Court considered two related arbitration enforcement proceedings involving LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED and LA DOLCE VITA FINE DINING COMPANY LIMITED as Applicants against multiple Respondents including ZHANG LAN and associated companies. Zhang was found in contempt of court for breaching injunctions concerning asset disclosure. The Court analyzed whether to impose a Hadkinson Order preventing Zhang's summons to set aside enforcement orders from being heard unless she purges contempt by complying with disclosure requirements. The Court applied the CWG v MH criteria and upheld the Hadkinson Order as proportionate and necessary given Zhang's continuing willful breach and impediment to justice. Further, the Court addressed whether security should be ordered against Respondents R2 and R3 conditioned on adjournment of their application to set aside enforcement orders pending Mainland court judgment. The Court found the arbitral awards manifestly valid and justified security of 40% of the award sum, rejecting the Respondents’ lack of credible disclosure and risk of asset dissipation. Finally, the Court considered the Respondents’ challenge to tribunal composition under CIETAC Rules Article 27(3). It held the parties’ arbitration clause, expressly modifying the CIETAC Rules for appointment procedure, prevailed over the default rule, and the tribunal was properly constituted. No manifest injustice or invalidity was found sufficient to set aside the awards. The Court accordingly granted the Hadkinson Order against Zhang, adjourned Respondents' summons on condition of security, and ordered costs against Zhang on indemnity basis.
Legal issues: Whether Hadkinson Order should be made against Zhang · Whether security should be ordered against R2 and R3 for their application to set aside or stay · Whether the composition of the tribunal complied with the Arbitration Clause and 2012 CIETAC Rules
Outcome: Hadkinson Order granted against Zhang requiring full asset disclosure before hearing her summons; summons of Respondents adjourned for 3 months subject to security for 40% of awards; summons dismissed if security not provided by deadline; costs ordered against Zhang on indemnity basis.
Cites 3 cases