Header graphic for print
ARBlog International Arbitration News, Trends and Cases

Tag Archives: Hong Kong

Court of Final Appeal extends time for First Media to challenge enforcement orders and judgment

In Astro Nusantara International B.V. and Others v. PT First Media TBK [2018] HKCFA 12; FACV 14/2017 (11 April 2018), Hong Kong’s highest court the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA“) handed down its decision on 11 April 2018 in a long-running dispute between members of a Malaysian media group (“Astro”) and First Media, a company that is a part of an Indonesian conglomerate referred to as Lippo.  The issue before the CFA concerns the refusal of the time extension to set aside the Hong Kong enforcement orders and judgment. The

Winding-up Petition v Arbitration Clause: Hong Kong Court Dismisses Winding-up Petition in Favor of Arbitration Clause

On 2 March 2018, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“CFI“) issued a notable decision which signifies a development of Hong Kong law in the contexts of insolvency and arbitration.  The CFI held in Lasmos Limited v Southwest Pacific Bauxite (HK) Limited [2018] HKCFI 426 that a winding-up petition issued on the ground of insolvency should generally be dismissed if there is an arbitration clause contained in an agreement giving rise to a debt relied on to support the petition.  This is a deviation from Hong Kong’s previous position

Hong Kong Court Refuses to Grant Crown Immunity to PRC State-Owned Enterprise

In TNB Fuel Services SDN BHD v. China National Coal Group Corporation HKCFI 1016 (“TNB Case“), the Court of First Instance (“CFI“) ruled that a PRC state-owned enterprise (“SOE“) was not entitled to Crown immunity. It upheld an arbitration award to be enforced against the SOE’s assets in Hong Kong. The TNB Case clarifies the position that any assertion of Crown immunity must come from the Crown; in this case by the Central People’s Government (“CPG“). SOEs will unlikely be granted Crown immunity, entitlement to which will be assessed by

Hong Kong courts are to have due regard to decisions affecting an arbitral award rendered by a court at the seat of arbitration

In Dana Shipping and Trading SA v Sino Channel Asia Ltd (HCCT47/2015), the Honourable Madam Justice Mimmie Chan of the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“CFI“), in the latest decision in this case, declined enforcement of an arbitral award that had been set aside at its seat in London. Background The enforcement proceedings concerned an arbitral award rendered in London-seated arbitral proceedings in favour of the Applicant (“the Award“). On 16 November 2015, the CFI granted an order to enforce the award (“the Enforcement Order“). On 27 November 2015,

Brexit, Sanctions and the Rise of Asian Arbitral Seats – Much Ado about Nothing or Reshuffling the Cards?

The results of the UK’s referendum, with a vote to leave the European Union, will not affect London’s position as a leading international arbitration seat and dispute resolution centre.  The recent developments do not change the fact that the UK has been and will continue to be a favored destination for dispute resolution. London has long enjoyed its position as a highly respected and oft-used seat for international arbitration.  Recently, however, the EU-imposed sanctions and the rise of other seats, together with the perceived expense of conducting hearings in London

Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre publishes new UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules

On 1 January 2015, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) introduced the HKIAC Procedures for the Administration of Arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (the “2015 Rules“). The 2015 Rules are designed to provide a single, user-friendly system for arbitrations conducted under any version of the UNCITRAL rules.  The 2015 Rules apply equally to international commercial and investment treaty arbitrations. The key changes include: (a) Notice and Response of Arbitration: There are now express provisions regarding the filing of the Notice of Arbitration and its Response. The parties, rather

Hong Kong’s Chief Executive affirms importance of arbitration

In his annual Policy Address, delivered earlier today, C Y Leung the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong SAR emphasised the importance of dispute resolution services to Hong Kong.  He observed that this was consistent with Hong Kong’s tradition of the rule of law.  He noted that during 2014, the China Maritime Arbitration Commission established an office in Hong Kong, its first branch office outside the Mainland. The Central Government and the HKSAR Government have recently signed the Host Country Agreement and the related Memorandum of Administrative Arrangements respectively with

New HKIAC model arbitration clauses

The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) has recently published new model clauses stipulating the law of the arbitration agreement. The new model clauses, which can be found at the HKIAC’s website (http://hkiac.org/en/arbitration/model-clauses), are to a large extent the same as the previous model clause, with the addition of an optional provision providing that “the law of this arbitration agreement shall be [Hong Kong] law.” As explained in the remarks to this optional provision, parties are advised to consider including this provision in their arbitration agreements, particularly when the law

The need for speed delivery in Hong Kong

Following the enactment of the new Arbitration Ordinance in Hong Kong in 2012, the Rules of the High Court, were amended to provide that any application to challenge and arbitral award on the ground of serious irregularity under s 4 of Schedule 2, and any application for leave to appeal on a question of law arising out of an arbitral award under s 6 of Schedule 2, must be made, and the originating summons served, within 30 days after the award is “delivered”. Previously the Rules had provided that the

Hong Kong Arbitration Update: Revised HKIAC Rules Published

In our arbitration update “New Rules, New Regime” published in April, we discussed the proposed amendments to the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Administered Arbitration Rules (the “Proposed HKIAC Rules“), as published in January 2013.  At that time, the Proposed HKIAC Rules were expected to come into effect on 1 May 2013.  On 12 June the final version of the HKIAC rules was published (the “Final HKIAC Rules“), which largely reflect the position adopted in the Proposed HKIAC Rules. However the following key changes have been made:

Hong Kong: New Rules, New Regime

On 28 March, the Arbitration (Amendment) Bill (“Bill“) was gazetted.  The Bill proposes to amend the Arbitration Ordinance (“Ordinance“) to support incoming revisions to the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Administered Arbitration Rules (“HKIAC Rules“), as well as provide for other developments.  The main revisions to the HKIAC Rules are the introduction of emergency arbitrator provisions, new powers for the HKIAC to join parties and consolidate arbitrations and new provisions to streamline the process of agreeing arbitrators’ fees.  The Bill updates the law to support the new emergency arbitrator provisions,