Read the full judgment text of HCCT 43/2024 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 27 February 2025 before Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Enforcement of arbitral award — Proper notice under Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) — Service of notice at contractual address by registered post — Deemed receipt provision — Failure to update address for service — Burden of proof on party applying to set aside enforcement — Discretion to enforce award — Parties’ contractual obligations on service — Public policy. The Plaintiff sought enforcement of an arbitral award where the Defendant alleged lack of proper notice and inability to present its case due to outdated contact details. The Court held that proper notice was given in accordance with clause 12.1 of the Agreements specifying the Silvercord Address for service. The Defendant failed to notify any change of address as required by clause 12.2 and did not rebut the presumption of deemed service. Attempts to serve additional addresses and email confirmed Plaintiff’s reasonable efforts. The Court rejected the Defendant’s claims of non-receipt as not credible. Furthermore, the Court exercised its discretion to enforce the Award, finding refusal unfair given the Defendant’s breaches of contractual notice provisions and failure to maintain communication channels. The application to set aside enforcement was dismissed with costs on indemnity basis. The judgment affirms the importance of parties obeying contractual notice provisions and that enforcement should not be avoided by a party’s own failings in maintaining notice addresses.
Legal issues: Proper notice for enforcement of arbitral award · Discretion to enforce arbitral award despite alleged failure of notice
Outcome: Application to set aside the Enforcement Order is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 2 cases