← All Authorities
Hong Kong article 34 model lawminimal curial interventionindemnity basis

Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v Pacific China Holdings Ltd (No 1)

[2012] 4 HKLRD 1; CACV 136/2011 (CA, 9 May 2012)
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHong Kong Court of Appeal
Year2012
StatusBinding authority

Key Principle

Setting aside an arbitral award under Article 34(2)(a) of the UNCITRAL Model Law requires the applicant to demonstrate that the procedural irregularity was sufficiently serious or egregious to have actually denied them the opportunity to present their case, and even then the court retains discretion to refuse set-aside where the violation had no effect on the outcome; a party unsuccessful in challenging an award will normally be ordered to pay indemnity costs.

Area of Law

arbitration

Related Cases

Re Shift Energy Asia Limited [2025] HKCFI 6415
Hyalroute Communication Group Limited v Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (Asia) Limited [2025] HKCA 936
CNG v G & Ors [2025] HKCFI 3598

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v Pacific China Holdings Ltd (No 1) and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v P...