Read the full judgment text of HCCT44/2001 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 15 March 2002 before Hon Ma J in Chambers.
Arbitration — Application for leave to appeal arbitration award — Strike out for want of prosecution — Arbitration Ordinance emphasizing party autonomy and speedy resolution — Statutory duties on parties and arbitrators to avoid delay — Court's power to strike out without demonstrating prejudice — Defendant applied to strike out plaintiff's application for leave due to inordinate delay in prosecuting appeal over 7 months — Plaintiff failed to comply with procedural requirements including timely service of affidavit evidence and fixing hearing date, despite defendant's repeated requests and warnings — Court found delay unacceptable and unjustified, holding that plaintiff's lax attitude incompatible with public policy fostering finality and expedition in arbitration — Discretion exercised in favour of defendant — Plaintiff's application struck out — Costs to defendant. Keywords: arbitration, strike out, want of prosecution, leave to appeal, Arbitration Ordinance, procedural compliance, expedition, finality.
Legal issues: Strike out application for want of prosecution under section 23 Arbitration Ordinance
Outcome: The plaintiff's Notice of Originating Motion for leave to appeal arbitration award was struck out for want of prosecution.