搜尋結果
2022年10月28日 · Judgment. In C v D, the Court of Appeal in Hong Kong held that the question of whether a pre-arbitration procedural requirement, such as negotiation, has been fulfilled or not is a question suitable for determination by an arbitral tribunal, i.e., a matter of admissibility.
2019年2月6日 · In the Year of the Dog, Hong Kong’s authorities and institutions have continued to build on this legacy 1) Its legislature brought into force reforms permitting third party funding for arbitration; its home grown arbitration institution, the HKIAC, released new rules; and its courts handed down a number of pro-arbitration decisions.
2021年10月28日 · Mr Starr outlined several key differences between Hong Kong and PRC practices: (1) asset clues are required by the PRC courts, for which private investigators are normally engaged; (2) translation and notarisation for the PRC require extra time; (3) there is a need for security in the PRC, often by way of insurance; and (4) service of the preser...
2015年7月15日 · Legal background Section 45(2) of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) (the Ordinance) empowers a court to grant an interim measure in relation to any arbitral proceedings, whether in or outside of Hong Kong, which have been or are to be commenced.
2022年3月1日 · On 15 December 2021, the Commission published a comprehensive Report setting out recommendations on the use of ORFSs in arbitration, and the appropriate form of regulation and the specific safeguards relating to ORFSs. This blog looks at the key recommendations in the Report. Overview of the Report.
2022年10月28日 · Kluwer Arbitration Blog. C v D: Hong Kong in Step with the Admissibility Versus Jurisdiction Debate. Prakritee Yonzon (University of Hong Kong) · Friday, October 28th, 2022 · ArbitralWomen. The differences between admissibility and jurisdiction in arbitration have been recognized in various jurisdictions, such as the UK, US and ...
2020年10月12日 · One holding that expectation, however, may be surprised by the existing Chinese legal regime as interpreted and applied by the Chinese judiciary. A recent ruling rendered by the Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court (“Guangzhou Court”) may have significantly altered the legal landscape of Chinese arbitration law.
