Offshore Litigation Blog

It is common ground that Hong Kong is a major international arbitration hub in Asia, and its role will only become ever more important given the advantages in enforcing Hong Kong arbitral awards in Mainland China.

In a recent decision of the Bermuda Court of Appeal, the judgment in Afiniti, Ltd. v Chishti offered a nuanced costs ruling following an appeal with mixed outcomes. The case provides valuable insights into the apportionment of costs in litigation where neither party emerges as a clear winner.

The recent Singapore Court of Appeal case of DEM v DEL offers significant insights into the complexities surrounding arbitration awards, particularly concerning infra petita challenges (failure by a judge or arbitrator to consider a claim or essential issue) when the appellant is a non-participating party in the underlying arbitration.

The judgment in the recent English case of Bugsby Property LLC and Anor v Omni Bridgeway (Fund 5) Cayman Invt. Ltd serves as a useful reminder of the test for the exercise of the discretion of the Court in appointing an arbitrator and the importance of taking care when drafting dispute resolution clauses.

In the recent Hong Kong case of Friendship Shipping and Trading SA v IVL Dhunseri Polyester Company SAE, the Plaintiff applied for an anti-suit injunction (ASI) to restrain the Defendant from continuing Egyptian legal proceedings against it, contending that the parties had agreed to arbitrate any dispute in Hong Kong per the arbitration agreement contained in a charterparty that was incorporated by reference in the bills of lading.

A decision looms for BVI law on the rules for determining the governing law as to the validity, scope and interpretation of arbitration agreements.

In a recent hearing to obtain a power of sale before the BVI Commercial Court, as part of the enforcement of an arbitral award, a power of sale was granted to the applicant without the need for any receiver to be appointed.

In the recent decision of Re Mega Gold Holdings Ltd, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance declined to follow the Privy Council’s BVI decision Sian Participation Corp (In Liquidation) v Halimeda International Ltd which clarified the approach to winding-up petitions in the context of agreements to arbitrate.

The decision in Credit Suisse London Nominees Limited v Principal Investing Fund I Limited and Chia Hsing Wang v LV II Investment Management Limited addressed an application seeking declarations that: 1) the company, Blue Water Ltd, of which the Plaintiff, Chia Hsing Wang (Mr Wang), is the ultimate beneficial owner, has a separate legal personality to him and; 2) Mr Wang is not liable for the obligations of Blue Water Ltd under the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) awards against it in favour of the Defendant, LV II Investment Management Limited (LV2IM).