Sanctioned offers are a significant feature of the litigation landscape in Hong Kong, providing parties a strong incentive to settle their disputes at earlier stages (Rules of High Court and Rules of District Court, O.22).
Nick Gall and Ashima Sood analyse the laws and regulations in Hong Kong to freeze and repatriate the proceeds of fraud and corruption in the latest edition of Getting The Deal Through: Asset Recovery 2018.
It is well recognised that the pro-arbitration and pro-enforcement approach of Hong Kong courts is the key attribute that underpins Hong Kong's position as an attractive venue for commercial dispute resolution.Due to the rapid economic growth in the markets and a surge in cross-border transactions, arbitration users across the globe are demanding a robust regulatory framework and a judicial climate that is pro-arbitration. Hong Kong has been successful in recognising these demands both in principle as well as in practice.This article considers:The pro-enforcement approach of courts in Hong Kong in the context of the recent judgment in U v A [HCCT 34/2016]. Other important developments in the arbitration regime in Hong Kong.
This article first appeared in the 11th edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Corporate Recovery & Insolvency; published by Global Legal Group Ltd, London.https://iclg.com/practice-areas/corporate-recovery-and-insolvency/corporate-recovery-and-insolvency-2017/hong-kong
On 13 December 2016, the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court of Jiangsu Province enforced an arbitral award made by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission Hong Kong Arbitration Center (“CIETAC HK”), making it the first CIETAC HK award to be enforced in mainland China.
The Dispute Resolution Global Guide provides practical analysis of topical cross-border issues and country-specific Q&A guides on dispute resolution law and practice worldwide. The Q&A guide aims to give a structured overview of the key practical issues including, for example, court procedures, fees and funding, interim remedies (including attachment orders), disclosure, expert evidence, appeals, class actions, enforcement of judgments, cross-border issues and the use of ADR. This article considers the pro-arbitration approach of courts in Hong Kong in the context of two recent cases T v C HCCT 23/2015 and Bluegold Investment Holdings Limited v Kwan Chun Fun Calvin HCA 1492/2015. It also considers other significant initiatives and developments in the arbitration regime concerning third party funding, consolidation, and costs of arbitrations.
Read the article on how Ashima Sood illustrates Lexis® Practical Guidance elevated her work efficiency and saved time on legal research.
The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (“HKIAC”) has recently released two updated Practice Notes on costs of arbitration which came into effect on 1 June 2016 to supplement the provisions on costs under the 2013 HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules (“Rules”).
This article first appeared in the 10th edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Corporate Recovery & Insolvency; published by Global Legal Group Ltd, London (www.iclg.co.uk).
In a judgment delivered on 4 March 2016 the Hong Kong CFI has ruled that the court need only be satisfied on a prima facie basis that a valid arbitration agreement applies, in order to stay court proceedings. The case in question is Bluegold Investment Holdings Limited v Kwan Chun Fun Calvin [HCA 1492/2015].The decision confirms Hong Kong’s position as an attractive seat for international arbitration and highlights the importance of ensuring consistency across suites of documents.