"This decision confirms Hong Kong's position as an
arbitration-friendly jurisdiction".
This ritual phrase seems to follow every law firm bulletin
reporting on the latest judgment staying proceedings brought in
breach of an arbitration agreement or granting indemnity costs
following unsuccessful applications to set aside arbitral awards,
and the like.
The truth of the statement is undoubted, but it is questionable
whether it adds much to the debate about the merits of Hong Kong as
a seat, or as a forum in which to enforce awards, relative to, say,
Singapore. Hong Kong is arbitration-friendly because it has
excellent hardware and software: legislation based on the UNCITRAL
Model Law, decades of jurisprudence, and good lawyers and judges. A
more precise statement, therefore, would be that Hong Kong is a
"rule of law-friendly" jurisdiction, because our judges
uphold their oaths and do their job in accordance with what the law
requires.
