Read the full judgment text of CACV 121/2003 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 16 June 2008 before Hon Tang VP, Stone J and Lam J.
Costs — Arbitration award enforcement — Indemnity costs awarded — Belated and meritless fraud allegations — Multiple litigations worldwide resisting enforcement — Court discretion under Town Planning Board v Society for the Protection of the Harbour Ltd (No 2) to order indemnity costs where special features exist — Subjective belief in fraud not determinative of merit — Pertamina failed to raise fraud allegations at first instance though documents existed — Pattern of global obstruction relevant — Order nisi on costs varied in favour of plaintiff. Karaha Bodas Company LLC sought enforcement of a New York Convention arbitral award against Pertamina, who unsuccessfully resisted enforcement and appealed. Belated and unfounded fraud claims were advanced in appeal, coupled with Pertamina’s widespread litigations to resist enforcement internationally. The Court of Appeal held these constituted special and unusual features warranting indemnity costs rather than the normal party and party costs. Consequently, the prior costs order was varied accordingly and costs were to be taxed if not agreed.
Legal issues: Basis for costs order in enforcement proceedings
Outcome: The order nisi as to costs is varied to award indemnity costs to the plaintiff; costs to be taxed if not agreed.
Cited by 5 cases