DUBAI INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE v. AL AHMADIAH CONTRACTING & TRADING AND ANOTHER

DUBAI INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE v. AL AHMADIAH CONTRACTING & TRADING AND ANOTHER

The 2nd Defendant's summons failed to specify any viable ground for setting aside the enforcement order and relied on statutory provisions (s89(2)(f) and s89(5)) that did not apply because the award had not been set aside, suspended, nor had any such application been made; accordingly the application to set aside the enforcement order was dismissed and costs awarded on an indemnity basis.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 613
Parties
Applicant / Respondent in the Arbitration: Dubai International Real Estate; Defendant / Claimant in the Arbitration: Al Ahmadiah Contracting & Trading; Defendant / Claimant in the Arbitration (2nd Defendant): Hip Hing Overseas Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 2018
Case Number
HCCT73/2017
Procedural Posture
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award (construction and Arbitration Proceedings) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Enforcement Order After Leave to Enforce Granted
Outcome
Application by 2nd Defendant to set aside enforcement order dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award, Setting Aside Arbitral Award, Arbitration Ordinance S89, Costs, New York Convention Compliance
Source Language
EN
Arbitration Civil Procedure Construction Law International Enforcement Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award Setting Aside Arbitral Award Arbitration Ordinance S89 Costs +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dubai International Real Estate

Applicant / Respondent in the Arbitration

Al Ahmadiah Contracting & Trading

Defendant / Claimant in the Arbitration

Hip Hing Overseas Limited

Defendant / Claimant in the Arbitration (2nd Defendant)

Procedural Posture

Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award (construction and Arbitration Proceedings) / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Enforcement Order After Leave to Enforce Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd Defendant specified grounds to set aside the enforcement order as required
  2. 2 Whether s89(2)(f) and s89(5) of the Arbitration Ordinance applied in the absence of any suspension or setting aside of the award by a competent authority
  3. 3 Whether the application should be dismissed for failing to disclose any viable cause

Ratio Decidendi

The 2nd Defendant's summons failed to specify any viable ground for setting aside the enforcement order and relied on statutory provisions (s89(2)(f) and s89(5)) that did not apply because the award had not been set aside, suspended, nor had any such application been made; accordingly the application to set aside the enforcement order was dismissed and costs awarded on an indemnity basis.

Court Disposition

Application by 2nd Defendant to set aside enforcement order dismissed

Orders

  • Application by 2nd Defendant dismissed for failure to disclose any viable cause
  • Costs of the application to be paid by the 2nd Defendant on an indemnity basis