Read the full judgment text of HCCT000107/1998 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 4 March 1999 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay, in Chambers.
Procedure — Arbitration — Money paid into court in respect of an arbitration award that has been concluded — Whether a Master had jurisdiction and was correct to order payment out of money paid into court despite a pending related action — Order 73, rule 15 requires court order for payment out; as arbitration was finalised, payment was a settlement offer not accepted, no security for plaintiff's claim — Master had jurisdiction and payment order justified. Plaintiff's claim that payment out led to double recovery by defendant was rejected as incorrect. Plaintiff’s application to set aside the Master's order was dismissed. Costs were awarded to the defendant on an indemnity basis and ordered to be paid immediately.
Legal issues: Payment out of money paid into court under concluded arbitration · Allegation of double recovery by defendant
Outcome: The application to set aside the Master's order is dismissed.