Read the full judgment text of HCCT23, 24, 25 & 26/2001 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 6 August 2001 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Arbitration law — Construction contract — Practical completion certificate validity — Extension of time claims and notice requirements — Time at large due to employer non-payment — Arbitrator's award finality and court supervisory role — Tests for leave to appeal and remission under Arbitration Ordinance sections 23 and 24 — Removal of arbitrator application — Majority of disputed issues fall under one-off factual and legal issues unique to contract — Court declined to interfere absent clear, obvious error or injustice — Held that Practical Completion certificate was valid despite minor defects and incomplete documentation; notice under SP 8.02 was not a condition precedent to extensions of time; arbitrator's preference of expert's method on extension calculation upheld; time was set at large due to employer non-payment; application to remove arbitrator dismissed for lack of exceptional circumstances — Costs ordered against applicant.
Legal issues: Practical Completion Date and Legal Effect of Practical Completion Certificate · Extension of Time Notice Requirements under Clause 23 and Related Special Provisions · Method of Calculating Extension of Time · Time at Large Due to Employer’s Non-Payment · Legal Standard for Remission under sections 23(2)(b) and 24 Arbitration Ordinance · Removal of Arbitrator under section 25 Arbitration Ordinance
Outcome: Applications under sections 23, 24 and 25 of the Arbitration Ordinance refused; no leave to appeal granted, no remission ordered, and no arbitrator removal ordered
Cites 1 case