A v. B1 AND ANOTHER

A v. B1 AND ANOTHER

The court dismissed both setting aside applications: the Tribunal complied with Article 43 (the EDP points were sufficiently identified in Ds' SOD and P had multiple fair opportunities to respond); no serious procedural breach or deprivation of the right to present the case was shown; the Tribunal's conclusions on construction and on the reasonableness of refusing the extension were within its permissible fact‑finding and discretionary domain and not manifestly incoherent or infra petita; the Costs Award was not vitiated by procedural unfairness because the Tribunal legitimately adopted a broad‑brush assessment of legal fees under s74 and Article 34 and applied a discretionary reduction;...

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 2444
Parties
Plaintiff: A; 1st Defendant: B1; 2nd Defendant: B2
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 April 2026
Case Number
HCCT113/2024
Procedural Posture
Setting Aside Arbitral Awards and Enforcement of Costs Award (hcct 113/2024 & HCCT 153/2024) / Substantive Hearing on Applications to Set Aside Partial Award and Costs Award and Summons for Enforcement
Outcome
1st OS (challenge to Partial Award) dismissed; 2nd OS (challenge to Costs Award) dismissed; enforcement of Costs Award granted; orders for sums paid into court to be paid out to Respondents; costs to Respondents on an indemnity basis (nisi).
Legal Topics
Early Determination Procedure (hkiac Article 43), Setting Aside Awards (uncitral ML Article 34 / S81 Ao), Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Tribunal Procedural Fairness and Right to Be Heard, Assessment of Costs in Arbitration, Implied Terms and Contractual Construction
Source Language
EN
Arbitration Contract Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Public Policy Early Determination Procedure (hkiac Article 43) Setting Aside Awards (uncitral ML Article 34 / S81 Ao) 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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Plaintiff

B1

1st Defendant

B2

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Setting Aside Arbitral Awards and Enforcement of Costs Award (hcct 113/2024 & HCCT 153/2024) / Substantive Hearing on Applications to Set Aside Partial Award and Costs Award and Summons for Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal complied with HKIAC Rules Article 43 in invoking and conducting the EDP
  2. 2 Whether Claimant was deprived of the opportunity to present its case (ML 34(2)(a)(ii))
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal exceeded its mandate or decided matters beyond the scope of the EDP

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed both setting aside applications: the Tribunal complied with Article 43 (the EDP points were sufficiently identified in Ds' SOD and P had multiple fair opportunities to respond); no serious procedural breach or deprivation of the right to present the case was shown; the Tribunal's conclusions on construction and on the reasonableness of refusing the extension were within its permissible fact‑finding and discretionary domain and not manifestly incoherent or infra petita; the Costs Award was not vitiated by procedural unfairness because the Tribunal legitimately adopted a broad‑brush assessment of legal fees under s74 and Article 34 and applied a discretionary reduction;...

Court Disposition

1st OS (challenge to Partial Award) dismissed; 2nd OS (challenge to Costs Award) dismissed; enforcement of Costs Award granted; orders for sums paid into court to be paid out to Respondents; costs to Respondents on an indemnity basis (nisi).

Orders

  • Dismissal of Plaintiff's Amended Originating Summons HCCT 113/2024 seeking to set aside the Partial Award
  • Dismissal of Plaintiff's Originating Summons HCCT 153/2024 seeking to set aside the Costs Award