Read the full judgment text of HCCT 7/2020 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 17 October 2023 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration — Enforcement of arbitral award — Extension of time to set aside enforcement order — Delay of over two years — No satisfactory explanation for delay — Importance of finality of arbitral awards — Application refused. Arbitration — Contingency fee arrangement — Alleged champerty and maintenance — Enforcement contrary to public policy — No sufficient evidence relating to Hong Kong litigation — No genuine risk to judicial integrity shown — Enforcement upheld. The dispute arose from a litigation fee agreement between BB, a US law firm, and KO, a businessman, relating to US Litigation. BB obtained an arbitral award against KO for unpaid fees. Enforcement order granted in Hong Kong in 2020; KO sought to set aside order more than two years late, contending illegality and public policy grounds. The Court, Mimmie Chan J, applied the legal principles for extension of time and found KO's delay unjustified. The Court further held KO failed to prove public policy grounds on champerty. Summons dismissed; KO ordered to pay costs to BB on indemnity basis.
Legal issues: Extension of time to set aside enforcement order · Whether the arbitration award enforcement is contrary to public policy due to champerty
Outcome: The summons to extend time and set aside the Enforcement Order and judgment is dismissed.
Cites 1 case