Read the full judgment text of CACV 79/2011 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 2 December 2011 before Hon Tang VP, Fok JA and Sakhrani J.
Arbitration enforcement — Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341) s.40E(3) — Public policy ground for refusal of enforcement — Apparent bias — Waiver of right to object — Mediation procedure irregularities — Court's supervisory role — Foreign arbitration awards enforcement — PRC Contract Law Article 54 — Share Transfer Agreements revoked on ground of exploitation of 'precarious position' — Unorthodox mediation at Shangri-la hotel involving Arbitration Commission's Secretary General and an arbitrator, proposing settlement without party consent — Respondents alleged procedural irregularity and bias, sought to set aside enforcement leave in Hong Kong — Reyes J found no waiver and apparent bias, refused enforcement — Court of Appeal held Respondents waived right to object by not promptly raising complaint during arbitration and that apparent bias insufficient to refuse enforcement — The Court gave weight to dismissal of setting aside application by supervisory court in Xi'an — Enforcement should only be refused where enforcement would violate the forum's fundamental conceptions of morality and justice — Actual bias generally required for refusal of enforcement of foreign award — The Court restored leave to enforce the award and ordered costs accordingly.
Legal issues: Waiver of right to object to arbitral irregularities · Apparent bias in enforcement of arbitration award · Requirement of actual bias for refusal of enforcement
Outcome: Appeal allowed; Reyes J's order to set aside enforcement leave set aside; enforcement of Award restored
Cites 3 cases