Read the full judgment text of HCCT 22/2010 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 17 June 2010 before Hon Saunders J.
Arbitration — Appeal — Leave to appeal against arbitral award — Whether factual findings can be overturned — Costs — Approach to indemnity costs on failed leave applications. The dispute arose from a charter-party and novation agreement involving TAIGO LIMITED and CHINA MASTER SHIPPING LIMITED under the Arbitration Ordinance Cap 341. The applicant sought leave to appeal against an arbitral award rendered following a documents-only arbitration procedure. The court confirmed that the applicant, having agreed to the procedure, cannot now challenge it and refused leave to appeal a factual finding regarding absence of misrepresentation, stating such findings must be obviously wrong or bizarre to be overturned. On costs, the court affirmed the rule that indemnity costs should normally be awarded against unsuccessful applicants for leave to appeal arbitral awards following recent Hong Kong authorities, without requiring special or unusual case features. The application was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal against arbitration award · Appropriate costs order for failed application for leave to appeal arbitration award
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Cited by 1 case · Cites 2 cases