Litigation & Dispute Resolution

In Sze Fung Engineering Limited v Trevi Construction Company Limited [2025] HKCA 278[1], the Hong Kong Court of Appeal (“CA”) ruled that the “back to back” wording in that case was not a “pay when paid” clause, but governed only the timing of payment.

The without prejudice (“WP”) rule generally prevents statements made in a genuine attempt to settle an existing dispute from being put before the court as evidence. Usually, these statements are made in communications between the opposing parties to a dispute. Can WP privilege attach to documents produced by third parties who are not parties to the dispute? This was a question before a deputy judge of the English High Court (“Court”) in BNP Paribas Depositary Services Ltd v Briggs & Forrester Engineering Services Ltd [2024] EWHC 2575 (TCC)[1].

In Y and Another v GI and Another [2025] HKCFI 1317[1], the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“Court”) allowed the defendant’s application for security for costs against the plaintiffs in respect of the plaintiffs’ application to set aside an arbitral award. In doing so, the Court found that the plaintiffs were resident outside Hong Kong, had no assets available in Hong Kong and the setting aside application had little prospect of success.