Read the full judgment text of HCCT 13/2012 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 5 April 2013 before Hon Au J.
Arbitration — Enforcement of arbitral award — Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) s 89(2)(d) — Tribunal’s jurisdiction and scope of arbitration — Parties to partnership dispute — Authority of majority partners under Partnership Deed — Effect of Settlement Deed on minority partners’ counterclaim — Material non-disclosure in ex parte application for leave to enforce award — Duty of full and frank disclosure — Continuity of duty until order made — Effect of non-disclosure — Discretion to re-grant leave inter partes — Costs orders. The claimant sought to enforce a London arbitral award against minority partners of the respondents after majority partners settled disputes with the claimant. The minority partners challenged enforcement alleging the tribunal acted beyond its jurisdiction and there was material non-disclosure in the ex parte application. The court held the tribunal’s decision on the Settlement Deed and minority partners’ counterclaim fell within the arbitration scope, as the total submissions extended beyond the claimant’s initial request and included all parties’ claims and defences. The court affirmed the duty of full and frank disclosure continues until the order is made and that the claimant failed to disclose the pending English challenge, warranting setting aside the ex parte order. Nonetheless, leave was re-granted inter partes as no other substantive ground to refuse enforcement existed and claimant’s conduct was not deliberate. The striking out summons for allegations of non-disclosure was dismissed. Costs were apportioned with indemnity costs to claimant for setting aside summons but no order on initial ex parte application costs, and costs to minority partners on striking out summons.
Legal issues: Tribunal acting in excess of terms of submission · Material non-disclosure in ex parte application · Whether to set aside or re-grant leave to enforce the Award · Whether to strike out parts of affirmation alleging non-disclosure
Outcome: Setting aside summons dismissed; ex parte order for leave to enforce Award set aside due to non-disclosure but leave re-granted inter partes; striking out summons dismissed.
Cited by 12 cases · Cites 2 cases