Image

Publications

ArbitralWomen members regularly publish articles in highly-regarded legal and ADR journals.

ArbitralWomen is also an Affiliate of Kluwer Arbitration Blog (KAB); all articles posted by ArbitralWomen Members on KAB under Affiliate are available under Publications.

C v D: Hong Kong in Step with the Admissibility Versus Jurisdiction Debate

  • Article Summary: In C v D, the Hong Kong Court of Appeal affirmed that compliance with pre-arbitration procedural requirements is a matter of admissibility rather than jurisdiction, placing the final decision within the arbitral tribunal's exclusive domain. Written by Prakritee Yonzon for AW, this article examines how this landmark ruling aligns HK with international arbitration practice. It analyzes the distinction between a claim's admissibility and tribunal jurisdiction under Section 81 of the HK Arbitration Ordinance and Article 34 of UNCITRAL Model Law.
  • Kluwer Arbitration Blog

Although the principal question in C v. D, was whether the Tribunal’s determination of a pre-arbitration procedural requirement is subject to recourse under Article 34(2)(a)(iii) or (iv) of the UNCITRAL Model Law, the case importantly also addresses the whether compliance with the pre-requisite of negotiation before arbitration was a question of admissibility or jurisdiction.

C v. D is therefore an important development in the landmark of Hong Kong as it establishes the tribunal’s prerogative to decide the difference between admissibility and jurisdiction in arbitration. While admissibility addresses whether or not it is appropriate for the case to be decided by the Tribunal, jurisdiction determines whether the Tribunal has the power to do so.