Attorney General v Shimizu Corporation (Hong Kong Court of Appeal CACV000080A/1996)

Procedural record

1. 19 September 1995Arbitration

   19 September 1995Arbitration

   Fourth Interim Award dated 19 September 1995

   Decision summary

   The award dealt with Shimizu Corporation's delay and disruption claims and other claims submitted for review or determination, and provided for compound interest at monthly rests at prime plus one percent.

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Shimizu Corporation

   Institution

   Arbitrator

   Brian Knight QC

   Authorities cited

   1

   • Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341)
     statute

   1 year, 3 months and 29 days later · 486 days

2. 17 January 1997Hong Kong

   17 January 1997Hong Kong

   Judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case CACV000080A/1996 dated 17 January 1997

   Court of Appeal of Hong Kong

   Case no.

   CACV000080A/1996

   Citation

   CACV000080A/1996

   Decision summary

   The Court of Appeal allowed the Attorney General's appeals concerning remission of the rubbish removal claim and Shimizu Corporation's three global claims. It directed reconsideration of the rubbish removal claim on the existing material with a direction in effect to dismiss it, discharged the remissions of the phase 2 form work, tower disruption, and additional reinforcement claims, and dismissed the appeal concerning the omitted overtime deduction. It granted leave to appeal on the prolongation-costs, rubbish-removal, and compound-interest issues, while the appeal concerning the arbitrator's jurisdiction to award compound interest was not heard and could be entertained by a differently constituted court.

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Representative

   Richard Fernyhough QC (For: Attorney General)

   Representative

   Teresa Cheng (For: Attorney General)

   Representative

   Denton Hall (For: Attorney General)

   Shimizu Corporation

   Representative

   Simon Goldblatt QC (For: Shimizu Corporation)

   Representative

   Peter Clayton (For: Shimizu Corporation)

   Representative

   Malleson Stephen Jaques (For: Shimizu Corporation)

   Court of Appeal of Hong Kong

   Judge

   G.P. Nazareth

   Judge

   B. Liu

   Judge

   Simon Mayo

   Authorities cited

   21

   • Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341)
     statute
   • Crosby Ltd v Portland Urban District Council ((1967) 5 BLR 121)
     case-law
   • P.T. Dover Chemical Co. v Lee Chang Yung ([1990] 2 HKLR 257)
     case-law
   • Pioneer Shipping v BTP Tioxide (The Nema) ([1982] AC 724)
     case-law
   • Seaworld Ocean Line Co. S.A. v Catseye Maritime Co. Ltd (The Kelaniya) ([1989] 1 Lloyd's Rep 30)
     case-law
   • Antaios Compania Naviera S.A. v Salen Rederierna A.B. (The Antaios) ([1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep 235)
     case-law
   • King v McKenna ((1990) 54 BCR 54)
     case-law
   • Moran v Lloyd's ([1983] 2 All ER 200)
     case-law
   • Williams v Wallies and Cox ([1914] 2 KB 478)
     case-law
   • Mabanaft GmbH v Consentino Shipping Co. SA (The Achiller) ([1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep 191)
     case-law
   • Blackford & Sons (Calne) Ltd v Christchurch Corporation ([1962] 1 Lloyd's Rep 349; (1962) 60 LGR 214)
     case-law
   • Anglo-Cyprian Trade Agencies, Ltd v Paphos Wine Industries, Ltd ((1951) 1 All ER 873)
     case-law
   • Kwan Lee Construction Co. Ltd v Elevator Parts Engineering Co. Ltd (Civil Appeal 127/1996)
     case-law
   • R. v. Trade and Industry Secretary, ex parte Lonrho Plc ([1989] 1 WLR 525)
     case-law
   • Eagil Trust Co Ltd v Pigott-Brown and another ([1985] 3 All ER 119)
     case-law
   • Cargill Inc v Marpro Ltd ([1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep 570)
     case-law
   • Mustill and Boyd, Law and Practice of Arbitration (2nd edition)
     academic
   • Keating on Building Contracts (6th edition)
     academic
   • Hudson's Building and Engineering Contracts (11th edition)
     academic
   • Halsbury's Laws of England (Volume 2)
     academic
   • Avala (1996 2 Lloyds LR 311)
     case-law
3. Date not availableArbitration

   Date not availableArbitration

   Second Interim Award

   Decision summary

   The award dealt with valuation of variations under clause 73(1)(b), to be assessed by Mr Plumley.

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Shimizu Corporation

   Institution

   Arbitrator

   Brian Knight QC

4. Date not availableArbitration

   Date not availableArbitration

   Third Interim Award

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Shimizu Corporation

   Institution

   Arbitrator

   Brian Knight QC

5. Date not availableHong Kong

   Date not availableHong Kong

   Judgment of Leonard J

   High Court of Hong Kong

   Decision summary

   Leonard J dismissed the Attorney General's applications to remit the rubbish removal and omitted overtime matters, ordered remission of Shimizu Corporation's phase 2 form work, tower disruption, and additional reinforcement claims, and refused leave to appeal on the identified prolongation-costs, rubbish-removal, and compound-interest issues.

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Shimizu Corporation

   High Court of Hong Kong

   Judge

   Leonard J

   Authorities cited

   1

   • Crosby Ltd v Portland Urban District Council ((1967) 5 BLR 121)
     case-law
6. Date not availableHong Kong

   Date not availableHong Kong

   Judgment of Seagroatt J

   High Court of Hong Kong

   Decision summary

   Seagroatt J held that the arbitrator had jurisdiction to order compound interest; the related appeal was not heard by the Court of Appeal and could be entertained by a differently constituted court.

   Participants

   Attorney General

   Shimizu Corporation

   High Court of Hong Kong

   Judge

   Seagroatt J