Read the full judgment text of HCCT 103/2023 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 28 May 2024 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Interim Measures — Whether interlocutory order constitutes an award — Leave to appeal under Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609) Schedule 2 section 6 — On-demand bond — Article 17 and 17A of UNCITRAL Model Law — Court confirms high threshold for leave to appeal — Interim injunction granted by arbitrator pending substantive arbitration dispute not a final award — Order enforcing interim measures under section 61 distinct from appealable awards governed by section 5 — Distinction emphasized by comparative authorities including G v N, ZCCM v Kansanshi, and overseas cases — Court dismissed leave application as Award was interlocutory and not subject to appeal, with costs awarded against Plaintiff. The case clarifies the scope and enforceability of interim measures in arbitration and the limited availability of appeals on such interlocutory orders.
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against the Award dismissed
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 4 cases