ARJOWIGGINS HKK2 LTD v. X CO

ARJOWIGGINS HKK2 LTD v. X CO

HKIAC was identifiable from the HKIAC Rules and the parties' subsequent adoption of Amended Terms of Appointment constituted a valid supplemental agreement under PRC law, the Respondent waived objections by participating and failing to promptly object, the Tribunal properly exercised jurisdiction over the Claimant's separate contractual claims under the JV Contract, and any alleged defect in the appointment of arbitrators did not amount to a denial of due process warranting setting aside the Award; accordingly the application to set aside the Order and Award is dismissed.

Citation
ARJOWIGGINS HKK2 LTD v. X CO
Parties
Applicant (claimant in Arbitration): ARJOWIGGINS HKK2 LIMITED; Respondent (respondent in Arbitration): X CO
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 October 2016
Case Number
HCCT53/2015
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Resist Enforcement Under Arbitration Ordinance (cap 609) / Chamber Decision on Application to Set Aside Award and Order for Enforcement
Outcome
Respondent's applications to set aside the Order and the Award dismissed.
Legal Topics
Validity of Arbitration Agreement, Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal, Seat and Lex Arbitri, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Appointment of Arbitrators, Waiver and Estoppel, Res Judicata Under Foreign Law
Source Language
EN
Arbitration Contract Law Civil Procedure Private International Law Validity of Arbitration Agreement Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal Seat and Lex Arbitri Enforcement of Arbitral Awards +3 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ARJOWIGGINS HKK2 LIMITED

Applicant (claimant in Arbitration)

X CO

Respondent (respondent in Arbitration)

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award and Resist Enforcement Under Arbitration Ordinance (cap 609) / Chamber Decision on Application to Set Aside Award and Order for Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration clause was invalid under PRC law for failing to identify the arbitration institution
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction given parallel PRC court proceedings and prior PRC adjudications
  3. 3 Whether the composition and appointment of arbitrators complied with the parties' agreement

Ratio Decidendi

HKIAC was identifiable from the HKIAC Rules and the parties' subsequent adoption of Amended Terms of Appointment constituted a valid supplemental agreement under PRC law, the Respondent waived objections by participating and failing to promptly object, the Tribunal properly exercised jurisdiction over the Claimant's separate contractual claims under the JV Contract, and any alleged defect in the appointment of arbitrators did not amount to a denial of due process warranting setting aside the Award; accordingly the application to set aside the Order and Award is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Respondent's applications to set aside the Order and the Award dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondent's applications dismissed with costs to the Applicant on an indemnity basis
  • Certificate for two Counsel awarded to Applicant