Arbitral Digest

Matter

Dana Shipping and Trading SA v Sino Channel Asia Ltd (High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance HCCT 47/2015)

  1. 3 February 2015Arbitration

    3 February 2015Arbitration

    Final Arbitration Award dated 3 February 2015, corrected 15 June 2015

    Decision summary
    The final arbitration award required Sino Channel Asia Ltd to pay Dana Shipping and Trading SA US$1,680,404.15, plus interest and costs, for breach of the contract of affreightment.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Dana Shipping and Trading SA
    Sino Channel Asia Ltd

    9 months and 13 days later · 286 days

  2. 16 November 2015Hong Kong

    16 November 2015Hong Kong

    Order of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance dated 16 November 2015

    High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance

    Decision summary
    The Court granted Dana Shipping and Trading SA leave to enforce the final arbitration award against Sino Channel Asia Ltd in Hong Kong.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Dana Shipping and Trading SA
    Sino Channel Asia Ltd
    High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance

    3 months and 27 days later · 119 days

  3. 14 March 2016Hong Kong

    14 March 2016Hong Kong

    Decision of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance in the case HCCT 47/2015 dated 14 March 2016

    High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance

    Case no.
    HCCT 47/2015
    Decision summary
    The Court considered Dana Shipping and Trading SA's application for security and Sino Channel Asia Ltd's application to set aside the order granting leave to enforce the arbitration award. It adjourned the set-aside application for three months from 8 March 2016 on condition that Sino provide security equal to 60% of the award amount within 21 days. If security was not provided, the application was to be dismissed and Dana could enter judgment in terms of the award. The Court vacated the hearing fixed for 16 March 2016 and ordered Sino to pay Dana's costs on an indemnity basis.

    Supporting details

    7 authorities · 10 participants
    Application
    Application for security — Security of 60% of the award amount ordered as a condition of continuing the set-aside application
    Application
    Application to set aside the order granting leave to enforce the award — Adjourned for three months subject to security; dismissal ordered if security was not provided
    Dana Shipping and Trading SA
    Representative
    Edward Alder (For: Dana Shipping and Trading SA)
    Representative
    Tsui & Co (For: Dana Shipping and Trading SA)
    Sino Channel Asia Ltd
    Representative
    Minju Kim (For: Sino Channel Asia Ltd)
    Representative
    Bryan Cave (For: Sino Channel Asia Ltd)
    Representative
    Beijing XCity (For: Sino Channel Asia Ltd)
    Representative
    Cai (For: Sino Channel Asia Ltd)
    High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance
    Other

    Authorities cited

    7
    • Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609))
      statute
    • Hong Kong Rules of the High Court (Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A))
      statute
    • Soleh Boneh International Ltd v Government of the Republic of Uganda ([1993] 2 Lloyd's Rep 208)
      case-law
    • Guo Shun Kai v Wing Shing Chemical Co Ltd ([2013] 3 HKLRD 484)
      case-law
    • Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v Pacific China Holdings Ltd ([2012] 4 HKLRD 1 (CA))
      case-law
    • Hebei Import & Export Corp v Polytech Engineering Co Ltd ((1999) 2 HKCFAR 111)
      case-law
    • Bowstead & Reynolds on Agency
      academic

Matter record

Report a correction

Dana Shipping and Trading SA v Sino Channel Asia Ltd (High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance HCCT 47/2015) · Matter