Read the full judgment text of HCCT 60/2024 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 25 July 2024 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Arbitration — Interim Injunction — Extension of time for filing evidence — Application refused — Court emphasises speedy resolution under Arbitration Ordinance — Duty of parties to proceed diligently and expeditiously — Consent summons causing delay rejected — Strict timetable enforcement in Arbitration List proceedings emphasised. The Plaintiffs sought an injunction restraining the Defendant from dealing with assets pending arbitration in the USA, filing evidence per Court timetable. The Defendant applied for 28-day extension citing arbitration developments, supported by consent summons. The Court refused the extension, ruling lengthy affidavits to justify delay unnecessary, and set strict evidence filing deadline. The Court reminded parties of the Arbitration Ordinance's purpose to facilitate quick dispute resolution and emphasized that delays undermine interim relief effectiveness. The parties were directed to promptly fix a hearing date or dismiss the action if claims withdrawn.
Legal issues: Extension of time for filing evidence · Duties of parties in injunctive relief applications
Outcome: The Court refused the Defendant's application for extension of time and ordered it to file evidence by 15 August 2024 or be barred from adducing evidence.
Cites 1 case