Read the full judgment text of HCCT 24/2022 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 5 January 2023 before Hon Anthony Chan J.
Civil procedure — Leave to serve writ outside jurisdiction — Contracts involving multiple jurisdictions — Arbitration clause validity under Mainland law — Forum conveniens — Jurisdiction agreement — Breach of contract claims and ancillary oral agreement. The Plaintiff, a Hong Kong company, sought leave to serve a writ on the Defendant, a Mainland company, in Jiangsu, PRC, for claims arising out of a Hong Kong governed Agreement and two PRC law Contracts with arbitration clauses. The court considered the relevant gateways under O 11, r 1, and held the Plaintiff has a good arguable case, a serious issue to be tried, and that Hong Kong is the appropriate forum. It was found that the arbitration clauses were invalid under PRC law and thus did not prevent the court’s jurisdiction or grant of leave. Additionally, claims for an oral ancillary agreement for Anchor Removal work were held to satisfy the same requirements. The application for leave to serve out was granted accordingly.
Legal issues: Leave to serve out of jurisdiction under O 11, r 1 · Effect of arbitration clauses under PRC law on leave to serve out · Jurisdiction and cause of action for Anchor Removal claim
Outcome: Application for leave to serve writ out of jurisdiction granted
Cites 1 case