{"id":29596,"date":"2019-11-13T00:28:49","date_gmt":"2019-11-13T00:28:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/asiallians.com\/zh-hant\/arbitration-hong-kong-tech-revolution-arbitrations-alternative-dispute-resolution-hong-kong\/"},"modified":"2020-02-20T10:48:02","modified_gmt":"2020-02-20T10:48:02","slug":"arbitration-hong-kong-tech-revolution-arbitrations-alternative-dispute-resolution-hong-kong","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/asiallians.com\/zh-hant\/arbitration-hong-kong-tech-revolution-arbitrations-alternative-dispute-resolution-hong-kong\/","title":{"rendered":"Arbitration in Hong Kong: The Tech Revolution of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Hong Kong"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#f7323f” down=”30″][vc_column_text]Executive Summary<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

A growing number of Hong Kong-based legal professionals are urging the industry to embrace innovation. Hong Kong Bar Association and Law Society agreed to a platform which could make traditional arbitrations ancient history.<\/p>\n

The Electronic Business-Related Arbitration platform (better known as eBRAM) is a non-profit company, built to provide an efficient and cost-effective alternative to alternative dispute resolution (ADR). CEO, Daniel Lam, describes eBRAM as a platform where “small business people” can access justice.<\/p>\n

LawTech can facilitate mediation in cross-border disputes and provide a one-stop dispute resolution to enterprises worldwide.\u00a0 Hong Kong’s Secretary for Justice, Teresa Cheng reiterated the government’s support for and investment in the legal tech sector- especially when it comes to mediation.<\/p>\n

SMEs account for approximately 45% of Hong Kong’s private sector employment. Nick Chang, chairman of eBRAM, suggests that they contribute to roughly 35% of the city’s economy. With robust legal protection, SMEs can increase productivity and further Hong Kong’s economic development.<\/p>\n

The government has allocated HK$150 million for the development of this platform. Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng and Chief Executive Carrie Lam reiterate the government’s support for investment in the legal tech sector, notably to modernise mediation.<\/p>\n

eBRAM could change how ADR and cross-border transactions are conducted in Hong Kong, which in turn could have a knock-on effect for the rest of Asia. The cost of lawyers, consultants and experts contribute to the inaccessibility of arbitrations to SMEs.<\/p>\n

eBRAM automates critical processes, making arbitration cheaper more accessible to SMEs. Furthermore, this process can enhance access across borders, languages and cultures and save time. Distinctly, participants in the Belt and Road Initiative and the Greater Bay Area may find this advantageous.<\/p>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#f7323f” up=”30″ down=”30″][vc_column_text]Background<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Mainland China has historically been hesitant to accept applications for interim measures from parties commencing arbitration outside of the region. However, Courts have indicated they may be receptive to granting interim measures in aid of Hong Kong-seated arbitrations in the last few years.<\/p>\n

Most notably, Talpa v. Shanghai Caixing (2016), where a Beijing Court granted interim measures to a Hong Kong seated arbitration. The plaintiff sought injunctive relief from the Beijing IP court, even though the license agreement provided for Hong Kong law and arbitration. It held that the claim was for \u201ctrademark infringement\u2019 and not \u201cbreach of contract\u201d thus, the Beijing IP court has jurisdiction to issue injunctive relief.<\/p>\n

In\u00a0Ocean Eleven Shipping Corporation v. Lao Kai Yuan Mining Sole Co., Ltd (2016) and Guangdong Yuehua International Trade Holdings Limited v. Sino-Tide Holdings Limited & Ke Junxiang (2016)<\/em>, Mainland courts were allowed to grand relief without specifying a legal basis. These specific cases further emphasized the need for formal arrangements.[\/vc_column_text][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#f7323f” up=”30″ down=”30″][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” padding_top=”15″ css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_column_text]The key objectives are as follows:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. To cost-effectively facilitate business negotiations;<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \n
    1. To prevent disputes involving enterprises worldwide; The Belt and Road region; the Greater Bay Area and Mainland-focused enterprises;<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
        \n
      1. To meet the demand, driven by the expansion of e-commerce, for legal and dispute resolution services across borders to be resolved online utilising innovative technology and artificial intelligence.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        The key features are as follows;<\/strong><\/p>\n