Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Jurisdiction vs admissibility

Legal area

Court

29 Dec 2023

G v. N

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3366
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT28/2023

Where an award denies relief because of illegality the supervisory court must assess whether enforcing the award would now conflict with Hong Kong public policy as currently understood (Patel/Monat); errors by a tribunal in characterising public policy may justify suspension and remission under Article 34(4) rather than immediate setting aside; however contractual limits on remedies (clause 6.10(e)) are matters of construction and not jurisdictional if not timely pleaded, so that ground for setting aside was dismissed.
31 Aug 2022

C v. D

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1199
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV387/2021

Whether an arbitral tribunal's decision on fulfilment of a pre‑arbitration procedural requirement is amenable to court review under Article 34(2)(a)(iii) depends on the parties' intention as evidenced by the arbitration agreement; where the agreement shows the dispute falls within the submission to arbitration, the tribunal's decision is not reviewable under Article 34(2)(a)(iii). In this case Clauses 14.2 and 14.3 were construed to include the issue within the submission to arbitration, so the tribunal's decision is not reviewable.
7 Jun 2022

C v. D

Citation

[2022] HKCA 729
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV387/2021

The Court held the tribunal's determination whether the pre-arbitration negotiation requirement was fulfilled was a matter of admissibility (prematurity) rather than jurisdiction; accordingly the Partial Award was not susceptible to setting aside under Art 34(2)(a)(iii) or (iv) and the appeal was dismissed.
29 Dec 2021

T v. B

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 3645
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT13/2021

Prematurity or non-compliance with contractual pre-arbitration conditions (including absence of a completion certificate under Clause 31) is a matter of admissibility not a true jurisdictional challenge; therefore the Arbitrator's Interim Award on prematurity was not reviewable under section 81/Article 34 and the Set Aside Application fails; accordingly the Court granted the Defendant's application to stay the writ action in favour of arbitration and dismissed the Plaintiff's set aside application; Clause 31 is not invalid as inherently contrary to public policy for producing a potential limi…
26 Aug 2021

KINLI CIVIL ENGINEERING LTD v. GEOTECH ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2503
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2141/2020

Defendant established a prima facie arbitration agreement within the subcontract and the disputes fall within its scope; although the clause uses permissive language and contains a proviso delaying arbitration until completion/termination, it is arguable that one party's election to arbitrate renders arbitration binding and questions about timing/conditions are matters for the arbitral tribunal; accordingly the stay application is granted and costs awarded to the applicant on an indemnity basis.
24 May 2021

C v. D

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1474
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT24/2020

The court held the objection went to admissibility rather than jurisdiction because the arbitration agreement and parties' consent were not impugned; therefore the challenge did not fall within Art 34(2)(a)(iii) or (iv) and the court lacked basis under s81 to set aside the partial award; the originating summons was dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

G v. N

C v. D

C v. D

T v. B

KINLI CIVIL ENGINEERING LTD v. GEOTECH ENGINEERING LTD

C v. D