Read the full judgment text of HCCT83/98 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 3 December 1999 before Hon Burrell J. in Chambers.
Construction contract dispute involving multiple contracts between the same parties for a single development. Only Contract A contained an express arbitration clause; Contract B's inclusion was disputed due to implied incorporation arguments by the Defendant relying on post-completion contract documents referencing 'said conditions'. The court held that the arbitration clause was not incorporated by implication into Contract B as the references came only after works were completed and the contract was self-contained. Consequently, the Defendant's application to stay proceedings and refer disputes to arbitration was refused. Contracts C, D, and E, which contained no arbitration clause, could not be stayed or referred to arbitration simply because they related to the same development. Costs were ordered in favour of the Plaintiff. No stay or referral to arbitration granted.
Legal issues: Incorporation of arbitration clause into Contract B · Stay of proceedings and arbitration for Contracts C, D, and E · Costs
Outcome: Application to stay proceedings and refer Contracts B, C, D, and E to arbitration refused; costs ordered in favor of the Plaintiff.