Read the full judgment text of HCCT 7/2021 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 31 March 2021 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Enforcement of award — Section 84 and 86 Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) — Order 73 rule 10 RHC — Summons to set aside enforcement order — Requirement of affidavit support under rule 10(6A) — Validity of notice of arbitration and appointment of arbitrator — Service by courier and email — Change of address — Defendants’ failure to prove grounds to set aside — Public policy arguments — Proper procedure and fair notice — Costs on indemnity basis. The Plaintiff obtained a final arbitral award made on 4 September 2020 by the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board against the Defendants in an arbitration arising out of a Share Subscription Agreement. The Court granted leave to enforce the award, but the Defendants subsequently applied to set aside the enforcement order on grounds including lack of proper notice and inability to present their case. The summons was issued without the required supporting affidavit, and the Court found no credible evidence to disprove valid service of notices by courier and email, including delivery receipts. The defendants’ assertion of lack of notice was disbelieved, and their participation in arbitration-related discussions supported their awareness. No valid grounds under section 86 were established to refuse enforcement, and public policy arguments failed. The summons was dismissed with costs on an indemnity basis to the Plaintiff, to be summarily assessed.
Legal issues: Proper Notice of Arbitration and Appointment of Arbitrator · Requirement for Summons Supported by Affidavit under Order 73 rule 10(6A) · Grounds to Set Aside Enforcement Order and Enforcement under Section 86
Outcome: The summons to set aside the enforcement order was dismissed with costs on an indemnity basis payable by the Defendants to the Plaintiff.
Cited by 2 cases