This case was filed by the applicant for the recognition and enforcement of the arbitration award of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ("HKSAR") in accordance with the "Arrangements of the Supreme People’s Court on the Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" (the "Arrangement"). In June 2014, Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC) made a final Hong Kong arbitration award ("HKIAC Award") on the dispute and ruled that the respondent should perform certain payment obligations to the claimant. In the opinion of the applicant, the HKIAC Award has taken effect. According to the "Arrangement" and other regulations, the applicant applied for recognition and enforcement of the HKIAC Award to the No.4 Intermediate People's Court of Beijing ("Beijing No.4 Intermediate Court") in August 2015.
In January 2018, Guantao Law Firm received a final ruling from the Beijing Higher People's Court ("Beijing High Court") that Beijing High Court adopted the agency opinion of Guantao Law Firm and maintained the view of Beijing No.4 Intermediate Court. The first instance of the court rejected the appeals for the Cayman Islands company that applied for recognition and enforcement of Hong Kong's arbitral awards. After more than two years, the Taiwanese listed company who represented by Guantao Law Firm won the winning result.
The fact of this case is not complicated but there are several issues that do not have conclusive answers. For example, whether the respondent was entitled to raise an objection to jurisdiction under the Arrangement, and whether the property of different companies should be mixed even among affiliates with an investment relationship. There are few clear legal provisions and precedent cases in these issues. According to the analysis of legal theory, Guantao Law Firm has creatively formulated a response strategy and eventually obtained the result that met customer’s satisfaction.