Hong Kong—court compels arbitration of insurance portion of employment compensation lawsuit (Lau Lan Ying v Top Hill Co)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Case details

Article summary

Arbitration analysis: The Hong Kong Court of First Instance in Lau Lan Ying v Top Hill Co granted a stay of third-party proceedings between a defendant and its liability insurer because there was a valid arbitration clause between the two parties. In doing so, the court held that a dispute between an insured and its insurer regarding whether the insured is entitled to indemnification is clearly a difference ‘arising out of’ the insurance policy. The court rejected the public policy arguments brought by the defendant, noting that English and Hong Kong case law establishes that arbitration clauses are to be respected even as to claims that can be brought under a domestic statute, unless the clause explicitly carves out certain types of relief. Written by Matthew Secomb, partner, and Clemency Wang, associate, at White & Case LLP.