Read the full judgment text of HCCT 45/2010 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 17 September 2012 before Deputy High Court Judge Lok.
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings — Garnishment — Payment into court — Timetable for payment — New Arbitration Order issued by Indonesian National Board of Arbitrators — Material change of circumstances — Application to discharge payment into court order — Stay of execution application — Court of Appeal jurisdiction on stay — Court denies postponement of payment timetable due to stay application — Court orders hearing of discharge application before fixing payment timetable. The garnishee, ACROSSASIA LIMITED, was ordered by the Court of Appeal to make payment into court but received an Arbitration Order requiring payment directly to a party in Indonesia. The court held that this new development constituted a change of circumstances warranting reconsideration of the payment timetable, and refused to fix the timetable until the discharge application was heard. The court also ruled that the garnishee’s application for stay of execution pending appeal did not merit delay at this stage, as stay applications fell under the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction. Consequently, the court directed a tight schedule for hearing the discharge application and reserved timetable decisions until thereafter.
Legal issues: Whether to fix timetable for payment into court in light of new Arbitration Order · Whether stay of execution should affect fixing the timetable
Outcome: The court refused to fix the payment timetable immediately and directed that the discharge application be heard first within a tight schedule.
Cites 1 case