HCAJ000059CWord格式.docx
- 文档编号:7502126
- 上传时间:2023-05-08
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:39
- 大小:46.05KB
HCAJ000059CWord格式.docx
《HCAJ000059CWord格式.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《HCAJ000059CWord格式.docx(39页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
THEOWNERSoftheshiporvessel
“HUATIANLONG”Defendants
Before:
HonStoneJinChambers(OpentoPublic)
DatesofHearing:
1,2,3&
4February2010
DateofSupplementalWrittenSubmissions:
9February2010(byplaintiffs)
19February2010(bydefendants)
DateofJudgment:
23April2010
INDEXTOJUDGMENT
Pages
Natureofthisapplication2-3
Thefactualbackground3-5
Chronologyoftheproceedingsto-date5-7
Evidenceatthehearingofthisapplication7-8
Thisapplication:
theargument8-9
(i)Sovereignimmunity9-11
(ii)‘Modified’sovereignimmunity11-14
(iii)Crownimmunity15
(a)Theconcept15-18
(b)TheHongKongposition18
Pre-1July199718-19
After1July199719-26
Decisiononthe‘Crownimmunity’debate26-29
(iv)Thedefendants’‘additionalground’29-31
Applicationofprincipletofact:
thestatusof31-42
thedefendants
Waiver42-47
Decisiononwaiver/submissiontothejurisdiction47-51
Summary52
Order52
Finally52-54
--------------------------
JUDGMENT
Natureofthisapplication
ThisisapplicationinvolvestheclaimedimmunityfromsuitofanentityoftheCentralPeople’sGovernment–andhencethecontentionthatthiscourthasnojurisdictionoveroneofthevesselsownedbythatentity.
1.Bysummonsdated21October2009thedefendantsintheseproceedings,whichonthewritinremarenamedas“TheOwnersoftheShiporVessel“HUATIANLONG”,butwhichnowhavebeenidentifiedastheGuangzhouSalvageBureau,haveappliedforastayand/ordismissalofthisactiononthegroundthat,inthewordsoftheapplication,“theDefendantenjoys,andhasnotwaived,thesovereignand/orcrownimmunityandhencethisHonourableCourthasnojurisdictionovertheDefendant”.
2.ThisisacasewhichhasbeeninexistencebeforetheHongKongcourtsincetheissueon15May2008oftheAdmiraltyactioninremagainst‘Theshiporvessel“HUATIANLONG”ofthePeople’sRepublicofChinaflag”resultinginthearrestafewdayslaterofthatvesselinHongKongharbour.How,then,hasthepresentsituationarisen?
Thefactualbackground
Theprincipalfactsleadingtothiscaseareessentiallyundisputed.Thisactionarisesoutofanallegedbreachofcontractonthepartofthedefendantownersofthe“HUATIANLONG”whichvessel,saytheplaintiff,failedtohonouritscommitmentunderaMemorandumofAgreemententeredintobytheplaintiffwiththeGuangdongSalvageBureau(‘GZS’)tomakeavailablethisvessel–whichisthelargestfloatingderrickcrane-bargebasedinAsia–toworkonoffshoreMalaysianandVietnameseprojects(‘theNewfield’and‘Talisman’projects)fortheinstallationofpipelinesandoilplatforms.
3.
Consequentuponthenon-appearanceofthe“HUATIANLONG”–which,ittranspires,intheperiodinquestionwasunderchartertoChinaNationalOverseasOilCompany,whichrefusedtoreleasethevesselfortheplaintiff’suse–theplaintiffsaysthatitwasunableproperlytocompletetheNewfieldandTalismanprojects,whichithadbeenawardedon16
January
2007,andhenceitnowclaimsdamagesagainstdefendantownersinthesumofsomehundredsofmillionsofUSdollarsforfraudulentmisrepresentationand/orbreachofcontract.
4.On21
April
2008theplaintiffinvokedtheAdmiraltyjurisdictionoftheHighCourt.Thewritwasnailedtothemast,andthebailiffarrestedthe“HUATINLONG”inHongKongwaters,thismassiveliftingbargeearlierhavingbeensentfromitsGuangzhoubasetoHongKongtoraisefromtheseabedaUkrainiantugwhichsomeweeksearlierhadbeenincollisionwithacontainervesselintheouterreachesoftheharbour,andhadsunkwithtragiclossoflife.
5.Byorderdated30
2008ReyesJdismissedthedefendants’applicationforsettingasidethewritandthisaction,andforthereleaseofthevesselfromarrest.
6.IntheskeletonargumentofcounselforownerswhichwasplacedbeforeReyesJatthishearingtosetasidethearrest,thefollowingappearsatparagraph
3thereof,undertheheading‘SovereignImmunity’:
“GZSisaBureauoftheMinistryofCommunications.Forthepurposeofthepresentapplication,GZSwillnotseektoinvokeanyprincipleofSovereignImmunity.However,GZSreservetherighttodosoatafuturestage.”
7.Somefiveweekslater,on9May2008,GZSultimatelysecuredthereleaseofthe“HUATIANLONG”byarrangingbailbondstobepostedonitsbehalfbyChinaMerchants’Bank;
intheevent,theapplicationforbailbond(s)washotlydisputedathearingsbothbeforethiscourtandintheCourtofAppeal.
8.AtfirstinstancetheOrderof9May2008wasfortheprovisionofbailinthesumofUS$65million,whichsum,consequentupontheadmissionoffreshevidence,wasvariedbytheCourtofAppealtothesumofUS$122,412.000:
see[2008]4HKLR719(1stinstance)and[2008]4HKLR745(CA).
9.HavingfurnishedbailandthussecuringthereleaseofthevesselbyOrderofReyesJon4
June
2008,thedefendantsnowseekanordergrantingimmunityfromsuit–hencethepresentapplicationcommandingthisjudgment.
Chronologyoftheproceedingsto-date
Whilstafullandhighlydetailedchronologyofthislitigationto-datehasbeensuppliedtothecourtduringthecourseofthishearing,it
maybeworthsketchingintheprincipalprocedurallandmarks,sincethisinformationisgermanetolegalargumentastothesustainabilityofthisapplicationinthecontextofwaiverandsubmissiontothejurisdiction.
10.Subsequenttotheissueofthewritinremon21
2008,andthefailureoftheapplicationtosetasidethewrit,thedefendantsacknowledgedserviceofthewriton2
May
2008.Thereafterfollowedthedecision,andsubsequentappeal,astotheamountofbailtobeposted,thewritwasamendedon15May,andon22May2008aStatementofClaimwasfiled;
someideaofthescaleofthecasecanbegleanedfromthefiguresclaimed:
thesumclaimedindamagesvariouslyispleadedatUS$190millioninwastedcosts/expenditure,US$96millionindamagesforfraudulentrepresentation,andalikesumindamagesforbreachofcontract.
11.On31July2008aDefenceandCounterclaimwasfiled
thesumofalmostUS$38millionisclaimedindamagesforwrongfularrest
andon16September2008aReplyandDefencetoCounterclaimwasfiled;
FurtherandBetterParticularsoftheStatementofClaimweresoughton3November2008.
12.Discoverybylisttookplacebetweenthepartiesovertheperiod13February2009to6October2009.
13.On12May2009aCaseManagementsummonswasissued,resultinginordersfromReyesJon7July(astocasemanagement)andon11
September
2009(astoserviceofwitnessstatements),andon26
2009theplaintiffgavenoticeofpaymentintocourtofsecurityforcostsinthesumofHK$5,812,800;
provisionforfurthersecurityforcostswasmadebyorderofthiscourtdated1
February
2009.
14.Exchangeofwitnessstatementsoffactandonquantumtookplaceon2
October
2009,andon6
2009anoticewasissuedseekingtosetdownthecasefortrial.
15.Afterdueconsultationwiththecourtandcounsel,trialdateswerefixedfora20dayhearingcommencingon5
July
2010andconcludingon30July2010,butthesedatesclearlynowareinjeopardygiventheissuanceofthedefendants’‘immunitysummons’on21
2009;
itappearstolerablyclearthatwhateverthiscourt’sdecisionuponthepresentapplication,eithersidewillembarkupontheappellatechainincircumstancesinwhichverylargesumsofmoneyareclaimed,inadditiontothepracticalsignificanceandlegalimportanceofthepointwhichiscentraltothisdebate.
Evidenceatthehearingofthisapplication
FortheplaintiffaffirmationevidencewasfiledbyMs
Hui
Kit
Yu,whosworetwoaffirmations,andMr
Lin
Feng.
16.MsHuiisatraineesolicitorofM/sHolmanFenwick&
Willan,whichfirmactsfortheplaintiff,whoprovidesevidenceofthefactualbackground,identifyingthedefendantsandtheirbusinessactivities,andcommentinguponvariousotheraspectsofthiscase,includingthatofwaiverandtheissueofsubmissiontothejurisdiction;
Dr
FengisaProfessorattheCityUniversitySchoolofLaw,andgaveevidencetothecourtquaexpertonChineselawinthecontextoftheclaimedimmunityfromsuit.
17.ForthedefendantsprimaryevidencewasprovidedbyMr
Fu
Shi
Qun,whosworefiveaffirmationsinsupportoftheapplication.
18.MrFuisanofficerofthedefendant,GZS,whohasbeenwiththatentitysince1980–hesaysthatheistheManagerofitsBusinessAdministrationOffice.Hisevidencewasfiledinsupportofthedefendant’simmunityapplication,andhesaysinterms(atparagraph
3ofhis1staffirmation)thatheis“authorizedto,andinstructedbytheMinistryofCommunications,GuangzhouSalvageBureauoftheCentralGovernmentofthePRC…andtoprovidetheCourtwithevidenceinsupportoftheDefendant’sentitlementtoCrownImmunity.”
19.Inaddition,anexpertChineselawlegalopinion,entitled‘The
LegalNatureofGuangzhouSalvage’,wasadducedonbehalfofthedefendantsbyProfessorLinYuan-minbyaffirmationdated11
November
20.BothexpertsonChineselaw,DrLinFeng,fortheplaintiff,andProfessorYMLin,forthedefendants,werecross-examinedbytheparties’respectiveleadingcounsel,MrCharlesSussexSCfortheplaintiffandMissTeresaChengSConbehalfofthedefendant
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- HCAJ000059C
![提示](https://static.bingdoc.com/images/bang_tan.gif)