Read the full judgment text of HCCT 45/2009 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 30 November 2011 before Hon Saunders J.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Enforcement of Arbitration Award — Mechanistic Approach — Costs — Indemnity basis — Court initially imposed conditions on enforcement but Court of Appeal set aside conditions allowing unconditional enforcement. Court reaffirmed the principle that a party unsuccessfully resisting enforcement must pay costs on indemnity basis absent special circumstances, referencing Xiamen Xinjingdi Group Ltd v Eton Properties Ltd & Anor [2008] 4 HKLRD 972 and A v R [2010] 3 HKC 67. The Respondent resisted enforcement unnecessarily extending proceedings and must pay Applicant’s costs of all relevant summonses on indemnity basis, with certificate for two counsel allowed. Orders made accordingly.
Legal issues: Costs liability for resisting enforcement of arbitration award
Outcome: The Respondent must pay the Applicant’s costs on an indemnity basis for resisting enforcement of the arbitral award, save for any expressly contrary orders.
Cited by 5 cases · Cites 1 case