Concerns over HK as a forum for arbitration, but arbitration lawyers would rather go to Paris, London ,Singapore and avoid Australia: Australian lawyers losing valuable work, but will still not admit that they have a Malaysian type Eusoffe Chin problem

by Ganesh Sahathevan






Japan Times has reported (quoting Bloomberg): 

International companies are increasingly avoiding Hong Kong as a jurisdiction for settling disputes through arbitration, one of the clearest signs yet that China’s tightening grip on the financial hub has eroded trust in its legal system.

Businesses are instead choosing rival hubs like Singapore, Paris and London, according to interviews with arbitration lawyers, a shift that has accelerated since the Chinese government bypassed Hong Kong’s legislature to impose a sweeping national security law.

While it is true that Hong and Singapore have been the preferred forums for arbitration due to proximity to the parties, the fact that parties and arbitration lawyers would prefer far away Paris and London to Australia given the current concerns about Hong Kong raises the question: why are arbitration lawyers and parties avoiding Australia, despite this being a well established, English speaking common law jurisdiction?

The matter of Australian judges ignoring precedent and instead using their courts and public standing to promote personal agendas, no matter how noble, is quite likely a factor

TO BE READ WITH 

Sunday, February 16, 2020

Australia's legal profession faces its Eusoffe Chin moment, but will Australians show the same courage as Malaysians did in seeking judicial reform? For details of the problem in Australia see documents on NSW Dept Of Justice website

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Eusoff Chin,2nd from left ,standing next

to disgraced Malaysian lawyer VK Lingam

In 2018 Australian defamation judge Judith Gibson told ABC Radio:

Judge Gibson described defamation proceedings as a "trial by ambush" that may actually prevent the truth from coming out.

"That's not a system of law that is going to attract admiration and respect from other countries or large companies wanting to do business in Australia."
Judge Gibson is calling on her profession to be more courageous and agitate for legal reform.
"If we don't affect changes, we are going to have a significant loss of faith in the courts as the significant provider of justice, and that is a matter of great concern."

Judge Gibson's warning would not be unfamiliar to lawyers in Malaysia who can recall former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin's gross distortion of Malaysia's defamation laws, which then led to a number of other questionable decisions, and consequently loss of faith in Malaysia's courts. 

The situation was somewhat reversed when Eusoffe was ejected after a concerted effort by Malaysia's lawyers and journalists, who were assisted in no small part by a story from Australia's ABC Radio Asia Pacific, reported by Di Martin.  

A landmark decision of the NSW Supreme Court against Malaysia's Vincent Tan also played a part.

The situation in Australia's courts today, especially in the State Of NSW, is as bad if not approaching that of Malaysia under the reign of Eusoffe Chin.An analysis of how bad may be found in an submission by this writer that can be found on the Department Of Justice NSW website at the links below:

Review of model defamation provisions - NSW Justice

www.justice.nsw.gov.au › defamationreview

Ganesh Sahathevan [PDF, 125kb] · Gary Duffy [PDF, 645kb] · Google [PDF, 142kb] · John O'Shannassy [PDF 30kb] · Law Council of Australia ...



The Australian Bar and the Law Society Australia have been frequent and forceful critics of judicial corruption in Malaysia'. It is left to be seen whether they are going to be as forceful as courageous as their Malaysian counterparts in removing their Eusoffe Chins.

END

Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 4:48 PM