World Sport Group Pte. Ltd v. Asian Tour International Ltd

HCA 2779/2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 2779 OF 2008

----------------------

BETWEEN

----------------------

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Carlson in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 9 January 2009

Date of Ruling: 9 January 2009

----------------------

R U L I N G

----------------------

1.I have to decide whether the qualifying school final stage, which is to be held between 13 and 17 January on two courses in Thailand is a sanctioned tournament of the Asian Tour as referred to in clause 2.1 of the Agreement.  If it is, it will be caught by the terms of the defendant’s undertaking of 6 January. 

2.Mr Ryan for the defendant submits that it is not.  Whilst of paramount importance for the participants because a good performance in it will result in qualification for the Asian Tour events in 2009, it is not a sanctioned tournament of the Asian Tour itself; it is merely the means by which a player qualifies to play on the Asian Tour events, whereby he has the opportunity to win the prize money on offer and to gain Order of Merit points which provide him with a world ranking amongst tournament professionals.

3.Mr Ryan says that “sanctioned” in these circumstances  is very much a term of art, to be given a restricted meaning, referring only to tournaments of the Asian Tour proper as opposed to a qualifying tournament with no prize money or ranking points, but which enables a player to get onto that tour.  Mr Tollan, for the plaintiff, submits that the question of whether prize money or ranking points are available is neither here nor there. 

4.“Sanctioned” means tournaments which come under the auspices or the umbrella of the Asian Tour.  One can use many words or expressions to describe what this entails.  Clearly, this qualifying tournament is under the auspices of the Asian Tour.  It is its - the Asian Tour’s - approved means of qualifying for the tour itself, and so on this view of things, it comes within the purview, to use yet another appropriate expression, of the Asian Tour organisation. 

5.I do not think the question of whether it provides prize money or ranking points is decisive.  The real question is what meaning the parties intended to ascribe to the expression “sanctioned event.”  Clearly, they intended to apply it to all their prize money and ranking points-earning tournaments.  The question is whether they also intended to extend that expression to the qualifying tournament. 

6.Last year, when there was no dispute between them, I am told this tournament was filmed for broadcasting by the defendant, and so I assume that they were prepared to treat it as a sanctioned event.  This in itself is of some assistance, but is not conclusive of the argument.  I have to approach the matter broadly and in a commonsense way, and whilst I see the attraction of Mr Ryan’s submissions, ultimately I have decided that the interpretation put forward by Mr Tollan is the correct one. 

7.The qualifying tournament is a “sanctioned event”.  It is approved by the Asian Tour, it is part and parcel of its program of events which starts with qualifying and continues into the tournaments which provide prize money and ranking points.  Therefore, I rule that this tournament is also caught by the undertaking. 

Richard Tollan, of Messrs Johnson, Stokes & Master for the Plaintiff

Luke Ryan, of Messrs Bird & Bird, for the Defendant