Read the full judgment text of HCCT 25/2011 and HCCT 26/2011 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 13 July 2011 before Hon Saunders J.
Arbitration enforcement — Service of order for leave to enforce arbitration awards — Proper procedure for service under O 73 r 10(4) of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341) — Order for service on corporate secretary of a wholly owned Hong Kong subsidiary valid — Dispute over address irrelevant where service made at subsidiary’s registered office as per corporate records — Respondent’s objection rejected. Extension of time to challenge enforcement refused due to lack of merit and delay tactic. The Applicants were granted declarations confirming due service of enforcement orders made 7 June 2011. The Respondent’s attempts to delay enforcement were rebuffed with costs awarded against it.
Legal issues: Service of order giving leave to enforce arbitration awards · Extension of time to apply to set aside enforcement orders
Outcome: The court declared that the enforcement orders of 7 June 2011 have been duly served. The Respondent’s application to extend time to apply to set aside the orders was refused. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicants’ costs forthwith.
Cited by 1 case