Summary

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 8(3) of the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth), the award dated 26 January 2021 of the Beijing Arbitration Commission (Award No. 0385) be enforced against the first respondent as if it were a judgment of the Court.

2. Judgment be entered against the first respondent in the amounts of:

(a) RMB 188,597,768.21 in respect of the principal amount outstanding; and

(b) RMB 22,344,120.60 for pre-judgment interest to 22 December 2022.

3. Interest be payable on the judgment in order 2 from the date of this order pursuant to s 52 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

4. The first and second respondents’ interlocutory application dated 22 November 2022 be dismissed.

5. The first and second respondents pay the costs of the proceeding.

6. Until further order of the Court, the freezing orders made on 31 August 2022 (as amended from time to time) be continued in aid of execution of the judgment entered in this proceeding.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

1. This is an application for the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award under s 8(3) of the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) (the IAA). The essential issue in dispute is whether to enforce the award would be contrary to public policy within the meaning of s 8(7)(b) such that the Court should consequently exercise its discretion to not enforce the award. The respondents contend that enforcement of the award would lead to such manifest unfairness and imbalance of remedy to the parties’ dispute that was the subject of the arbitration that an Australian court would not enforce it.

2. The respondents also contend that the arbitration agreement and award tendered by the applicant are not adequately certified or authenticated and that the award is not adequately translated, as required by s 9 of the IAA, with the result that the award should not be enforced.

...