Evelyn Chan and Yandy Lam have contributed the Hong Kong Chapter for Lexology’s Enforcement of Judgements 2022. Representing jurisdictions worldwide, this new volume in the Getting The Deal Through series offers expert analysis of the key issues relating to the enforcement of foreign judgments. Topics covered include: treaties, regulations and conventions, limitation periods, types of enforceable order, competent courts, defences, judicial requirements and procedures, significance of the enforcing jurisdiction’s public policy to the enforcement of foreign judgments, awards and enforcement process.
This article considers the pro-arbitration approach of courts in Hong Kong in the context of two recent cases. It also considers other significant initiatives and developments in the arbitration regime concerning third party funding, consolidation, and costs of arbitrations.
With cross-border litigation on the rise, recognition and enforcement of judgments rendered by foreign courts takes on increasing significance. Nick Gall and Lydia Mak present a structured guide to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements in Hong Kong:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9d20f9bb-eb6f-4212-bbcd-f23e89dd1ba2
Currently a foreign judgment can be enforced in Hong Kong by one of two means. Firstly, at Common Law, and secondly, through the Statutory Registration Scheme, namely the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Ordinance (Cap. 319).
In the recent case of Chan Sang v Chan Kwok & Ors [2016] HKCU 401 (“Chan Sang v Chan Kwok”), Master Harold Leong held that a Mainland judgment is final and enforceable where a certificate has been issued by the original court to that effect.
This is the first reported decision of the Hong Kong courts under the Mainland Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Ordinance (Cap. 597) (the “Ordinance”).
The decision affirms the Hong Kong Courts approach to uphold, rather than set aside, judgments issued in the Mainland.
