Parties regularly seek to set aside or resist enforcement of arbitration awards on the basis that the award contravenes public policy (usually in combination with other grounds in Article V of the New York Convention). The argument rarely succeeds but it did so in the Hong Kong High Court’s 2018 decision in Z v Y  HKCFI 2342.
Stephenson Harwood reviews the case, where the Court enforcement under section 95(3)(b) of the Arbitration Ordinance on the basis that it would be contrary to public policy to enforce an award on the basis that there were valid grounds to claim that a guarantee to secure obligations were “tainted by illegality” and the tribunal had not addressed them. … READ MORE
See also the articles published by/in: