Last week, Delos Dispute Resolution hosted its Journal Series with a spotlight on Hong Kong, exploring the implications of HKCFA decision in C v D.
Amidst a flurry of write ups on C v D, Delos's "A case in time" for Hong Kong stands out as it gathered:
👉 Rimsky Yuen SC - a prominent Hong Kong arbitrator and former Secretary for Justice - who discussed the C v D appellate decision's implications on arbitrator practice;
👉 Simon Chapman KC - a talented solicitor-advocate who argued C v D before the HKCFA - in setting out the basis for the court's decision and how the case was argued;
👉 Queenie Lau - a dynamic Hong Kong barrister with a flourishing arbitration practice - who discussed C v D's implications for counsel practice and specifically on how the arbitration agreements are to be drafted in light of the HKCFA decision;
👉 moderated by insightful and intuitive Jonathan Lim who authored a seminal piece on the US Supreme Court's decision in BG v Argentina in deciding a similar issue;
and yours truly covered the C v D implications for treaty-based disputes seated in Hong Kong.
There, very helpfully, the HKCFA offered guidelines on how the Hong Kong judiciary is likely to entertain treaty-based pre-arbitration requirements (such as the cooling off periods and the local litigation requirements).
The HKCFA judgment is available in the link below, with Justice Gummow and Justice Ribeiro distinguishing between commercial arbitration and treaty-based arbitration: https://lnkd.in/guqPjBCS
Commercial Mediator at Bankside Chambers
8moTwo of the best minds in the field!