Read the full judgment text of HCCT73/2000 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 6 March 2001 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Article 16(3) Model Law — Arbitration Ordinance Cap.341 sections 13B and 23 — Plaintiff challenging jurisdiction by summons for declaration and by originating motions for leave to appeal — Whether ruling on jurisdiction is a preliminary question and if appeal lies — Court holds jurisdiction rulings are preliminary and no appeal lies under Article 16(3) — Plaintiff's summons for declaration procedurally premature and dismissed — Defendant's strike out summons granted with limited costs — Costs of leave to appeal summonses also awarded to defendant. The court found the plaintiff’s procedural challenge premature given the arbitrators’ jurisdictional rulings and their statutory finality, rejecting plaintiff’s argument that section 23 governs appeals generally without limiting Article 16(3). This decision culminated in dismissal of the declaration summons and rejection of any appeal, safeguarding arbitration procedural efficiency and finality.
Legal issues: Right of appeal under Article 16(3) of the Model Law · Procedural correctness of the plaintiff's summons for a declaration and defendant's strike out summons
Outcome: Plaintiff's summons for declaration dismissed; defendant's strike out summons granted with costs limited to $3,000; costs of leave to appeal summonses awarded to defendant; no appeal lies on jurisdiction ruling.