Read the full judgment text of HCCT 76/2025 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 10 October 2025 before Hon Anthony Chan JA (sitting as an additional judge of the Court of First Instance).
Arbitration — Anti-suit injunction — Arbitration agreement validity — Estoppel and abuse of process — Winding up and provisional liquidator applications — Scope of arbitration agreement — Hong Kong supervisory jurisdiction — Comity and public policy — Waiver of arbitration rights — Contractual negative covenant — Conduct of parties. The Plaintiff sought an anti-suit injunction (ASI) to restrain the Defendant’s winding up and provisional liquidator applications in the BVI on grounds of breach of a broad arbitration agreement incorporated by reference in the Subscription Agreement. The court found the Defendant was estopped from denying the arbitration agreement’s validity by reason of inconsistent positions taken in related BVI proceedings and his election by conduct. Citing FamilyMart and relevant authorities, the winding up application was held to breach the arbitration agreement and was restrained, but the provisional liquidator application fell outside the arbitration clause's scope and was not restrained. Hong Kong’s pro-arbitration policy and lack of overriding public policy concerns supported the injunction. The Plaintiff had not waived its arbitration rights despite prior conduct in related discovery proceedings. The court exercised its supervisory jurisdiction to grant the ASI against the winding up application but dismissed that against the provisional liquidator application. Costs were reserved with directions for submissions.
Legal issues: Validity and enforceability of the arbitration agreement · Breach of arbitration agreement by commencement of winding up and provisional liquidator proceedings · Role of comity and public policy in granting anti-suit injunction · Whether the Plaintiff has waived or lost the right to arbitrate by conduct in discovery proceedings
Outcome: An anti-suit injunction is granted against the winding up application pending arbitration; no injunction granted against the provisional liquidator application; summarily refusal on the interim injunction summons.
Cites 1 case