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.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341) — Model Law Article 16(3) — Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal — Preliminary ruling on jurisdiction — Right of appeal — Leave to appeal — Procedural abuse — Strike out application. The plaintiff, WELTIME HONG KONG LIMITED, challenged the jurisdiction of two arbitrators hearing arbitration claims involving the defendant, KEN FOR WARD ENGINEERING LTD, by summons seeking declarations of no jurisdiction and subsequently by originating motions for leave to appeal. The defendant filed summons to strike out the declaration summons arguing procedural impropriety. The Court found the arbitrators' rulings on jurisdiction to be preliminary rulings under Article 16(3) of the Model Law as adopted in Hong Kong law, which precludes any right of appeal. Consequently, the plaintiff's summons was procedurally defective and thus struck out as an abuse of process. The Court dismissed the plaintiff's summons for declaration with costs and granted the defendant's strike out summons with costs limited to $3,000. The costs of the leave to appeal summonses were also awarded to the defendant. No appeal rights exist against such preliminary jurisdiction rulings under the Arbitration Ordinance incorporating the Model Law. The orders emphasize the finality of arbitral tribunal jurisdiction rulings and prevent multiplicity of proceedings on the same issue.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal from arbitrator’s jurisdiction ruling · Strike out plaintiff's summons for declaration for lack of jurisdiction
Outcome: Plaintiff's summons for declaration dismissed; defendant’s strike out summons granted with costs; no right of appeal on jurisdiction issue.