Read the full judgment text of HCCT69/2004 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 17 December 2004 before Recorder Fok SC.
Arbitration — Security for Costs — Appeal against Arbitrator’s Award — Leave to Appeal — Questions of Law — Misconduct — Setting Aside and Remission under Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341). The applicant, GOLDEN SAND MARBLE LIMITED, challenged an arbitrator’s order for security for costs of HK$300,000 made against it in arbitration with HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED. The court examined whether leave to appeal should be given on questions of law against the award under section 23(3)(b) of the Ordinance. It affirmed the strong presumption of finality in arbitration awards and held that no proper question of law substantially affecting rights was demonstrated. The court further considered and rejected applications to set aside or remit the award under sections 23(2) and 24(1), finding no procedural mishandling or exceptional errors. A claim of arbitrator misconduct under section 25(2) for allegedly ignoring evidence of ongoing contracts was also dismissed, holding that rejection of insufficient evidence did not amount to misconduct. The court dismissed the application and ordered costs to be borne by the applicant. The judgment underscores the restricted scope for court intervention in arbitration awards, especially on factual disputes and discretionary decisions relating to security for costs.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal against arbitral award for security for costs · Setting aside or remitting arbitral award under sections 23(2) and 24(1) Arbitration Ordinance · Misconduct of arbitrator under section 25(2) Arbitration Ordinance
Outcome: Application dismissed; leave to appeal refused; Award affirmed; costs ordered to be paid by applicant to respondent
Cites 2 cases