Case number: 42
Article number: model arbitration law / 9
Thessaurs issue:
Country of decision: United Kingdom
Year of decision: 1992
Type of decision: Judicial decision

Case 42: MAL 9
Hong Kong: High Court of Hong Kong (Barnett, J.) 2 March 1992
Interbulk (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Safe Rich Industries Ltd.
Published in English: (1992) 2 Hong Kong Law Reports, 185 and 1992 Hong Kong Law Digest, C7

(Abstract prepared by the Secretariat)

The plaintiff, shipowner, obtained an injunction against the defendant, charterer. The charter-party contained a clause providing
for arbitration in England under English law. The defendant sought to have the injunction set aside.

The court held that, pursuant to s. 14(6) of the Arbitration Ordinance, Hong Kong courts had no jurisdiction to grant interim
relief, in cases where there was a valid arbitration agreement providing for arbitration elsewhere than in Hong Kong.

The court noted that under article 9 MAL the courts of Hong Kong were empowered to grant an "interim measure of
protection" to a party to an arbitration to which MAL applied. The court recognized that it was "... at least open to argument"
that a court of a state that had adopted MAL might be more ready to assist a party to an international arbitration agreement,
notwithstanding the fact that the arbitration had its seat elsewhere.