Hong Kong—challenging the award—categories of serious irregularity
Hong Kong—challenging the award—categories of serious irregularity

The following Arbitration guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Hong Kong—challenging the award—categories of serious irregularity
  • Equivalent provisions in the Arbitration Act 1996 (England and Wales)
  • Failure to give equal treatment to the parties (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(a))
  • Tribunal exceeding its powers (otherwise than by exceeding its jurisdiction) (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(b))
  • Failure to comply with agreed procedure (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(c))
  • Failure to deal with all issues (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(d))
  • Institution or person exceeding powers (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(e))
  • Failure to give an interpretation of an uncertain or ambiguous award (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(f))
  • Fraud or public policy (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(g))
  • Form of the award (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(h))
  • more

This Practice Note considers the categories of serious irregularity on which an application challenging an arbitral award for serious irregularity may be brought where parties have opted in, or are deemed to have opted in, to the relevant provisions of Schedule 2 to the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) (AO). This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Hong Kong—challenging arbitral awards on grounds of serious irregularity (AO, Sch 2).

Note: The Hong Kong cases referred to below are not reported by LexisNexis® UK.

There are nine categories of serious irregularity on which arbitral awards can be challenged under AO, Sch 2, s 4(2).

Equivalent provisions in the Arbitration Act 1996 (England and Wales)

The wording of AO, Sch 2, s 4 is similar to that of section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). Accordingly, English case law considering AA 1996, s 68 can be considered for assistance in interpreting AO, Sch 2, s 4.

For guidance on the position under AA 1996, s 68, see Practice Notes: AA 1996—challenging the award—categories of serious irregularity (s 68) and AA 1996—challenging the award on grounds of serious irregularity (s 68).

Failure to give equal treatment to the parties (AO, Sch 2, s 4(2)(a))

Failure to comply with AO, s 46 is a serious irregularity under AO, Sch