Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Arbitration agreement

Legal area

Court

10 Oct 2025

X v. Y

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4796
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT76/2025

The court granted an anti-suit injunction restraining the BVI winding-up (WU) proceedings because the Defendant had adopted the Subscription Agreement and its Hong Kong-seated HKIAC arbitration clause (and was estopped from denying it), the factual precursors of the WU Application are arbitrable under the Arbitration Agreement and FamilyMart, and there were no discretionary reasons to refuse relief; the PL Application was not restrained because it falls outside the Arbitration Agreement and the BVI court may have jurisdiction to appoint provisional liquidators.
26 Sept 2025

LAM PO YEE v. YU SHUI MUI

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4245
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2092/2024

Stay Summons dismissed because the Plaintiff failed to prove an arbitration agreement or entitlement under the Contract (Rights of Third Party) Ordinance (no evidence Qookka's agreement with the Defendant conferred a benefit or treated Plaintiff as party), and the Plaintiff had already made the first statement on the substance of the dispute by pursuing an interim injunction with substantive affidavits, thereby precluding reliance on s20; the discovery application was premature and exceptional circumstances were not shown; costs awarded to Defendant on an indemnity basis, gross HK$200,000.
19 Nov 2024

FRIENDSHIP SHIPPING AND TRADING S.A. v. I.V.L. DHUNSERI POLYESTER COMPANY S. A. E.

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3180
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT66/2024

The originating summons was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to support it with admissible sworn and filed evidence; the Court would not admit unfiled or unsworn affidavits de bene esse in these circumstances. Alternatively, even assuming arguendo a prima facie Hong Kong arbitration clause existed, an anti-suit injunction was refused on equitable grounds because of undue delay, the advanced stage of proceedings in Egypt, wasted resources and the plaintiff’s lack of clean hands in its dealings with this Court.
4 Nov 2022

YIP CHI WAN (suing by her attorney, LO CHI ON) LO CHI ON v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF MERRY COURT, KOWLOON AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1264
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ6265/2020

s.20(1) Arbitration Ordinance operates independently of Order 12 rule 8; TP established a prima facie arbitration agreement in Clause 11.4 read in context and the court must refer the dispute to arbitration; consequently the third party proceedings were stayed and all further proceedings in respect of the defendant's claim against TP were referred to arbitration; costs ordered to TP on an indemnity basis.
12 Apr 2022

LS v. FL

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1050
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA561/2021

The 2020 oral agreement was a separate contract with a different subject matter and performance (procurement of purchases from a third party in Hong Kong) unconnected to the Distribution Agreement; there was no prima facie arbitration agreement covering the 2020 Agreement and therefore the stay under section 20 could not be granted.
21 Sept 2021

L v. M N AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2829
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT6/2021

The 2nd Defendant discharged the limited onus to establish a prima facie arbitration agreement covering the Plaintiff's claims; the correspondence did not demonstrate a clear, unambiguous mutual intention to abandon the arbitration clause. Accordingly the court must stay the action against the 2nd Defendant under s20 and leave questions of jurisdiction and compliance with the contractual dispute procedure to the arbitral tribunal. A case management stay against the 1st Defendant was justified because the 1st Defendant gave a written undertaking to be bound by the arbitration outcome, removing…
8 Sept 2021

GENG FENG v. A.I. INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2701
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3355/2016

The summons for a temporary stay was dismissed because the defendants are not parties to the arbitration and arbitral findings would not be binding on them; the defendants' offer to be bound was insufficient given a live jurisdictional challenge that may render any arbitral findings irrelevant; staying the action would cause injustice by delay and there was no abuse of process to justify a stay, applying the principles in Linfield Ltd v Taoho Design Architects Ltd.
27 Jul 2021

HOUTAI INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LTD v. LEUNG YAT TUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2192
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1725/2019

Leave to appeal was refused because the intended appeal lacked a reasonable prospect of success; the stay of proceedings against the Remaining Defendants was a proper exercise of the court's case management discretion given substantial factual overlap with the arbitration, the real risk of issue estoppel and abuse of process, and Linfield was distinguishable on the facts.
21 May 2019

IPS INTERNATIONAL POLYSACKS GMBH v. INTERSACK HOLDINGS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1336
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW323/2018

The court granted a stay of the winding-up petitions pending the outcome of arbitration pursuant to the Notice of Arbitration dated 22 March 2019 addressed to CK Park and Phil Park, but allowed the petitioner to take reasonable steps to serve the 3rd respondent; the costs of the summonses were ordered to be paid by the 2nd respondent.
27 Oct 2017

POLLARD CONSTRUCTION CO LTD v. LEE KWONG KONG and TO CHUN YIN t/a HUNG CHONG (FOUNDATION) CONSTRUCTION CO

Citation

POLLARD CONSTRUCTION CO LTD v. LEE KWONG KONG and TO CHUN YIN t/a HUNG CHONG (FOUNDATION) CONSTRUCTION CO
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5635/2016

The court stayed the proceedings and referred the plaintiff's claim to arbitration because Clause 20(i) is a valid and sufficiently wide arbitration agreement covering claims 'in connection with' the Sub-contract; there exists a real dispute since the defendant has not admitted liability to the plaintiff; and under s20 of the Arbitration Ordinance the court must stay and refer such disputes to arbitration. Costs were awarded to the defendant on an indemnity basis.