Read the full judgment text of HCCT 69/2022 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 8 May 2023 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration — Setting aside arbitral award — Alleged failure to give adequate reasons and deal with issues of foreign and domestic illegality, misrepresentation, contractual breach and events of default — Application under Article 34 of Model Law — Tribunal’s reasoning on foreign illegality including alleged illegal purpose under Korean law was adequate and addressed Plaintiffs’ submissions; dismissal on merits not objectionable despite alleged errors — Interpretation of section 298 and 300 SFO in assessing domestic illegality involved contested factual and legal issues fully canvassed by parties; no deprivation of opportunity — Reliance and inducement test applied by Tribunal consistent with pleaded issues, facts and commercial context — Claim of breach of PSA clause 5(a) deemed abandoned from Post-Hearing Brief submissions, Tribunal entitled to limit consideration — Tribunal’s jurisdiction over events of default under Notes, distinct from Security Agreements subject to Cayman courts, appropriately exercised — Court upheld Award and dismissed application to set aside, ordering costs against Plaintiffs.
Legal issues: Issue of foreign illegality · Issue of domestic illegality under section 298 SFO · Issue of whether Defendants made false statements of fact inducing the Agreements · Issue of breach of contractual clauses, specifically clause 5(a) of the PSA · Issue of jurisdiction and findings on occurrence of events of default under the Notes
Outcome: Plaintiffs’ application to set aside the Award dismissed.
Cites 3 cases