Read the full judgment text of cacv 128/2004 on BabelCite. This high court of the hong kong special administrative region court of appeal judgment was delivered on 14 February 2006 before Hon Rogers VP, Le Pichon and Yuen JJA.
Civil appeal concerning contractual disputes under building contracts and arbitration proceedings. The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal under section 22(1)(a) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance as no claim for a liquidated sum was made, despite the large amounts involved. Leave under section 22(1)(b) was also refused as the questions raised did not constitute matters of great general or public importance; the agreement under dispute was highly unusual with no precedent and not likely to recur. The court declined to grant a stay of arbitration proceedings, holding that Clause 86 arbitration submission was unaffected and that no irreparable harm justified injunctive relief. A variation of the costs order was likewise refused, the court holding that costs of the initial application were appropriately ordered as costs in the appeal. The defendant's appeal motivations were considered insufficient to alter the costs order. Applications were dismissed and the court reaffirmed prior costs rulings.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal under section 22(1)(a) of Cap.484 · Leave to appeal under section 22(1)(b) of Cap.484 · Stay of arbitration proceedings · Variation of costs order
Outcome: Applications for leave to appeal, stay of arbitration and variation of costs order refused