Read the full judgment text of HCCT 155/2024 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 1 August 2025 before Mr Recorder William Wong SC in Chambers (Not open to Public).
Contractual dispute concerning the validity and scope of an arbitration agreement in Clause 43.1 of a Term Facility Agreement (TFA) between HYALROUTE COMMUNICATION GROUP LIMITED (Plaintiff) and INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF (Defendant) arising from loan and guarantee obligations amid political upheaval in Myanmar. The Plaintiff sought an anti-suit injunction in Hong Kong to restrain the Defendant from presenting winding-up proceedings in Cayman Islands, alleging breach of arbitration agreement mandating resolution at HKIAC. The Defendant contended winding-up petition and proceedings under Cayman law do not breach Clause 43.1 as they do not finally resolve disputes nor determine rights, and anti-suit injunction would improperly bar the Cayman home court’s discretion and public policy. The Court analysed Hong Kong and Cayman legal principles on contractual anti-suit injunctions, the impact of foreign law on construction of arbitration agreements and effect of winding-up actions, referencing leading cases including Re Guy Lam, Sian Participation, Re BPGIC, The Angelic Grace and Donohue v. Armco. It held the Plaintiff failed to meet the high probability threshold as Cayman winding-up proceedings are not final resolution of disputes under Clause 43.1 when construed under Hong Kong law considering Cayman law’s effect. The Plaintiff’s underlying defence was found hopeless and frivolous but merits consideration is limited in anti-suit injunction context. The Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s application, granting a costs order nisi in favour of the Defendant. This case highlights the nuanced intersection of arbitration clauses, insolvency proceedings across common law jurisdictions, and the principles governing anti-suit injunctions.
Legal issues: Whether the presentation of winding-up proceedings breaches the arbitration agreement in the TFA · Relevance of the merits of underlying dispute in anti-suit injunction application · Whether foreign court’s approach to arbitration agreement enforcement is relevant to anti-suit injunctions
Outcome: Application for anti-suit injunction dismissed; Summons and Originating Summons dated 16 December 2024 dismissed
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 5 cases