Read the full judgment text of HCCT 73/2023, HCCT 16/2024 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 24 September 2024 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Anti-suit injunction — Arbitration agreement under English law with seat in Hong Kong — Russian court proceedings commenced in breach of arbitration agreement — EU sanctions against Defendant and related regulatory orders — Defendant’s challenge to Hong Kong Court’s jurisdiction based on absence of Basic Law Article 19 Certificate alleging acts of state and foreign affairs involved — Court rejects jurisdiction challenge — No state acts involved; dispute solely between banks — Anti-suit injunction principles applied favoring enforcement of arbitration agreement absent strong reasons — Effect and consequences of EU Sanction irrelevant for jurisdiction and injunctive relief — Futility of arbitration not established; award binds parties even if enforcement impossible — Public policy arguments based on foreign policy and sanctions rejected — Defendant’s access to justice not impaired — Court grants injunctions restraining Defendant from pursuing Russian Proceedings, including mandatory order and declarations consistent with established Hong Kong and English authorities such as Ever Judge, Congo, Kuwait Airways and Barcalys — Cost order made against Defendant. The judgment clarifies narrow scope of Basic Law Article 19 on acts of state, confirms enforceability of arbitration agreements notwithstanding foreign sanctions, and enforces parties’ contractual autonomy in international arbitration disputes with cross-border complications. This decision affirms the Hong Kong Court’s supervisory and injunctive powers to uphold arbitration agreements against foreign court proceedings even in the context of international sanctions and geopolitical conflicts.
Legal issues: Jurisdiction and requirement for Art 19 Certificate · Existence of dispute to support arbitration and injunction · Effect of EU Sanction and futility of HK Arbitration · Refusal of relief on public policy grounds · Whether to grant anti-suit injunction and related relief
Outcome: Dismissal of Defendant’s Jurisdiction Summons; grant of all relief sought by Plaintiff in 1st OS and 2nd OS, including anti-suit injunctions, mandatory orders, declarations and anti-enforcement injunctions.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 2 cases