Read the full judgment text of HCCT 67/2019 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 11 November 2020 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Arbitration Award — Failure to give reasons on interest and costs — Remission of Award to Arbitrator under sections 4, 5 and 6 of Schedule 2 of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) — Applicant’s application for leave to appeal and variation of costs order — Threshold for leave to appeal — Court’s power under section 5(7) Schedule 2 — Reasonableness of parties’ conduct in consenting to remission and procedural economy — Costs order. The Applicant applied for leave to appeal and variation of an Award relating to interest and costs dated 15 November 2019. The Arbitrator failed to give reasons on interest and costs, leading the Court to direct remediation of the Award with parties’ consent. The Court examined the high threshold for leave to appeal under section 5(7) of Schedule 2 to the Arbitration Ordinance and found the Applicant’s insistence on varying the costs order unreasonable and unjustified. The Court rejected the assumption that remission equated to the Applicant’s success. It also criticized both parties for failing to act reasonably and promptly to minimize delay and costs. The ultimate decision was that each party should bear its own costs of the Originating Summons.
Legal issues: Threshold for granting leave to appeal arbitral award · Whether remission of the Award reflects fault or success of the Applicant · Reasonableness of parties’ conduct regarding remission and costs
Outcome: Each party to bear its own costs of the Originating Summons; no leave to appeal granted; Award remitted to Arbitrator.