Read the full judgment text of HCCT 107/2025 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 11 November 2025 before Deputy High Court Judge Jonathan Wong.
Construction and arbitration — Anti-suit injunction — Arbitration agreement scope — Alleged Settlement Agreement disputes — Interpretation of arbitration clauses under Fiona Trust principle — Contractual ground for injunction — Comity considerations — Hong Kong Court supervisory role over HKIAC arbitration — Prima facie case threshold for interlocutory relief — Cross-border proceedings involving Hong Kong and Mainland China — Dongguan Proceedings challenged as inconsistent with arbitration agreement — Substituted service ordered due to evasion — Interim anti-suit injunction granted to restrain foreign parallel proceedings pending final determination. P invested in B Group under investment agreements containing broad HKIAC arbitration clauses. Disputes arose over Out of Group Assets disposed by D claiming personal rights under an Alleged Settlement Agreement. Hong Kong court held that arbitration clauses cover disputes connected to the Alleged Settlement Agreement despite lack of direct arbitration clause and D’s non-party status, following established authorities. Court rejected discretionary reasons to refuse injunction including respect for Mainland court’s pending jurisdictional ruling, emphasizing party autonomy to arbitrate disputes. Interim injunction restrains D from continuing Mainland proceedings, costs awarded to P. Parties directed to prepare for substantive hearing on originating summons.
Legal issues: Whether the disputes arising out of or in connection with the Alleged Settlement Agreement fall within the arbitration clauses in the Agreements · Discretion to grant an anti-suit injunction despite pending Mainland jurisdictional challenge
Outcome: Interim anti-suit injunction granted pending resolution of the originating summons
Cites 7 cases