Shagang South -Asia (Hong Kong) Trading Co Ltd v Daewoo Logistics

The arbitration agreement's provision that arbitration is 'to be held in Hong Kong' carries an implied choice of Hong Kong as the seat and Hong Kong law as the curial law; there are no clear words or significant contrary indicia to displace this implication; clause 19 of the Gencon form is not incorporated or applicable; the arbitrator was not validly appointed under English law.

Parties: Claimant: Shagang South-Asia (Hong Kong) Trading Co. Ltd; Defendant: Daewoo Logistics
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 05 February 2015
Procedural Posture: Commercial Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award Under S.67 Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome: Application granted; Award set aside; Tribunal not properly constituted
Legal Topics: Arbitration Seat Determination, Curial Law, Contract Interpretation, Arbitrator Appointment Validity

Arbitration Commercial Law Arbitration Seat Determination Curial Law Contract Interpretation Arbitrator Appointment Validity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Shagang South-Asia (Hong Kong) Trading Co. Ltd

Claimant

Daewoo Logistics

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award Under S.67 Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

1 Whether arbitration under the contract is subject to English or Hong Kong curial law
2 If English curial law applies, whether the appointment of Mr Rayment as sole arbitrator was validly made

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted; Award set aside; Tribunal not properly constituted