厦门新景地集团有限公司.doc

cacv 106/2008 CACV 197/2008 in the high court of the hong kong special administrative region court of appeal civil appeal noS. 106 AND 197 of 2008 (on appeal from HCCT NO. 54 of 2007) IN THE MATTER of Sections 2GG and 40B of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341) and IN THE MATTER of the Arbitration Award dated 27 October 2006 awarded by China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission BETWEEN 厦門新景地集團有限公司 formerly known as 厦門市鑫新景地房地產有限公司 Applicant and ETON PROPERTIES LIMITED (裕景興業有限公司) 1st Respondent ETON PROPERTIES (HOLDINGS) LIMITED (裕景興業(集團)有限公司) 2nd Respondent Before: Hon Rogers VP in Chambers Date of Hearing: 20 October 2008 Date of Decision: 20 October 2008  D E C I S I O N This is an application by the appellants themselves to stay two appeals. The appeals are against decisions of Reyes?J and they arise in this way. There was an arbitration agreement and to put it as blandly as possible, it was for development of land and, in short, the party who I shall call “the applicant” for convenience but is actually the respondent to these appeals, was to develop the land which was in control of the respondents. The arbitration which arose in these circumstances, arose because the respondents, instead of passing the land over to the applicant, developed it themselves. I am not going to go into the reasons why that happened and as to whether those were reasons which caused the land to be developed by the respondents were valid, because that is what happened. So the arbitration took place and it seems that, at that stage - the stage when the CIETAC Award was made - the original agreement could be put into effect one way or another. The arbitration award was that first, RMB1,275,000 should be paid by the two respondents to the applicant and, secondly, that the respondents shall continue to perform the agreement that had been made in July?2003. That is what happened. Then application was made to enforce that CIETAC Award in Hong Kong and tha