P v. M

P v. M

The court held that the tribunal committed a serious irregularity by deciding entitlement on the basis that the September Letter and November Breakdown constituted contractual notice when M had not pleaded or relied on those documents, thereby depriving P of a fair opportunity to address the adequacy of those purported notices; accordingly the court declared parts of the Award to be of no effect pending reconsideration and remitted the issue to the tribunal for directions and further submissions.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2280
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent in the Arbitration): P; Defendant (claimant in the Arbitration): M
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 October 2018
Case Number
HCCT30/2018
Procedural Posture
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings / Application in Chambers to Set Aside Parts of an Interim Award (challenge Under Schedule 2 of the Arbitration Ordinance)
Outcome
Court declared certain paragraphs of the Interim Award to be of no effect pending reconsideration, remitted the matter to the arbitral tribunal for directions and further submissions, and ordered costs to the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity, Set Aside/remission of Award, Notification/notice Requirements, Waiver and Estoppel, Natural Justice/fair Hearing
Source Language
EN
Arbitration Contract Civil Procedure Construction Law Serious Irregularity Set Aside/remission of Award Notification/notice Requirements Waiver and Estoppel +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P

Plaintiff (respondent in the Arbitration)

M

Defendant (claimant in the Arbitration)

Procedural Posture

Construction and Arbitration Proceedings / Application in Chambers to Set Aside Parts of an Interim Award (challenge Under Schedule 2 of the Arbitration Ordinance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal committed a serious irregularity by deciding entitlement based on documents never pleaded or relied upon by the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was deprived of a fair opportunity to present its case and to meet the tribunal's reliance on the September Letter and November Breakdown
  3. 3 Whether the award (or parts) should be set aside or remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the tribunal committed a serious irregularity by deciding entitlement on the basis that the September Letter and November Breakdown constituted contractual notice when M had not pleaded or relied on those documents, thereby depriving P of a fair opportunity to address the adequacy of those purported notices; accordingly the court declared parts of the Award to be of no effect pending reconsideration and remitted the issue to the tribunal for directions and further submissions.

Court Disposition

Court declared certain paragraphs of the Interim Award to be of no effect pending reconsideration, remitted the matter to the arbitral tribunal for directions and further submissions, and ordered costs to the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 169, 170, 172, 174 and 175 of the Interim Award declared to be of no effect pending and until further order of the tribunal
  • Remit the specified matters to the arbitral tribunal for reconsideration and directions to permit P to make submissions and M to reply