Wrox Programmer Forums

Need to download code?

View our list of code downloads.

Go Back   Wrox Programmer Forums > XML > XSLT
Password Reminder
Register
Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
XSLT General questions and answers about XSLT. For issues strictly specific to the book XSLT 1.1 Programmers Reference, please post to that forum instead.
Welcome to the p2p.wrox.com Forums.

You are currently viewing the XSLT section of the Wrox Programmer to Programmer discussions. This is a community of tens of thousands of software programmers and website developers including Wrox book authors and readers. As a guest, you can read any forum posting. By joining today you can post your own programming questions, respond to other developers’ questions, and eliminate the ads that are displayed to guests. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free .
DRM-free e-books 300x50
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old April 12th, 2013, 11:23 AM
Authorized User
Points: 151, Level: 3
Points: 151, Level: 3 Points: 151, Level: 3 Points: 151, Level: 3
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 31
Thanks: 3
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Unhappy xslt footnotes from 2 xmls

Hi I have the below 2 xmls

HTML Code:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--DOCTYPE chapter SYSTEM "H:\DTD\SMGHK.dtd"-->
<chapter num="A">
	<title>
		<content-style font-style="bold">PART 1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES</content-style>
	</title>
	<section level="sect1">
		<title>
			<content-style font-style="bold">Chapter 5: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF ARBITRATION IN HONG KONG</content-style>
		</title>
		<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="1.">
			<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
			<para>
				<phrase>5.001</phrase> This chapter discusses the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.609), from a historical perspective and outlines the development of arbitration legislation in Hong Kong since the British established the Colony of Hong Kong in 1842.<footnote num="1">
					<para>For a short history of arbitration generally, see Kaplan, Spruce and Moser, <content-style font-style="italic">Hong Kong and China Arbitration Cases and Materials</content-style> (Butterworths, 1994), xxxiii.</para>
				</footnote> In addition to the Arbitration Ordinance, it also briefly discusses different sources of arbitration law in Hong Kong.</para>
		</section>
		<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="2.">
			<title>SOURCES OF ARBITRATION LAW IN HONG KONG</title>
			<para>
				<phrase>5.002</phrase> In addition to the arbitration agreement itself and the arbitration rules nominated under that agreement, or otherwise selected by the parties, there are a number of specific sources of arbitration law in Hong Kong which may impact on arbitration proceedings which are either conducted in Hong Kong or according to Hong Kong law.</para>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(a)">
				<title>Legislation</title>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.609)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.003</phrase> A new Arbitration Ordinance was enacted by the Hong Kong legislature on 10 November 2010 (Cap.609) and the new law came into effect on 1 June 2011. It replaces the old Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341) and is the first major overhaul made to Hong Kong&#x2019;s arbitration law since 1997, making this a significant milestone in the development of the arbitration law in Hong Kong.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.004</phrase> One of the key features of the new Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.609) is the adoption of a majority of the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (&#x201C;UNCITRAL Model Law&#x201D;) into the arbitration legislation, albeit with amendments to cater for Hong Kong. Another key feature of the new law is the provision on the protection of confidentiality in arbitration proceedings as well as court hearings related to those proceedings. As a starting point, court proceedings relating to arbitration are not to be heard in open court. Such proceedings will be heard in open court only if any party so applying can satisfy the court that for good reasons the proceedings ought to be heard in open court. The new law also provides that unless otherwise agreed by the parties or under any exceptions as provided for in the ordinance, no party may publish, disclose or communicate any information relating to arbitral proceedings and awards. The new law adheres to the international practice that arbitral awards should only be made public with the prior consent of those parties involved with the arbitration. This provision seeks to strike a balance between safeguarding the confidentiality in arbitration and the need for parties in the arbitral proceedings to protect or pursue their legal rights or for them to enforce or challenge an arbitral award. Recent initiatives proposed by the UNCITRAL Model Law have also been included in the new law such that the Hong Kong court is empowered to recognise and enforce interim measures ordered by an arbitration tribunal sitting outside Hong Kong as well as the requirement that an arbitration agreement be in writing to include electronic modes of communication. The new law is self-contained so that it will be easier for users to find all relevant provisions in one place, more certain and more easily accessible to arbitration users and practitioners from around the world. The provisions of the Ordinance are discussed in detail in subsequent chapters.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>Other legislation</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.005</phrase> In addition to the Arbitration Ordinance, the Rules of the High Court contain provisions relating to the court&#x2019;s powers to make orders in respect of arbitration proceedings and to enforce awards. In particular, O.73 deals with arbitration proceedings.<footnote num="2">
							<para>For a more detailed discussion of the role of the courts, see Chapter 4.</para>
						</footnote> See also paras.16.012 to 16.015.</para>
				</section>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(b)">
				<title>International agreements</title>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.006</phrase> As will be seen later in this chapter, the development of arbitration law in Hong Kong has in large part, and certainly since the early 1980s, reflected developments in international arbitration law. Hong Kong&#x2019;s arbitration legislation has been amended specifically to incorporate into Hong Kong law international agreements which facilitate recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards made in foreign jurisdictions and which establish &#x201C;model&#x201D; procedures, according to which international arbitrations may be conducted. The two principal international agreements which have been incorporated into the Arbitration Ordinance are given below.</para>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>The New York Convention</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.007</phrase> On 10 June 1958, the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards was adopted by the United Nations Conference on International Commercial Arbitration in New York (the New York Convention).<footnote num="3">
							<para>Arbitration Ordinance, see Appendix, s.2. Please note that the New York Convention came into force on 7 June 1959.</para>
						</footnote> This provided for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards between states which were signatories to the New York Convention (see also paragraphs 16-02 and 16-20). As a British Colony, Hong Kong became a party to the New York Convention when it was ratified by the United Kingdom in 1975.<footnote num="4">
							<para>The United Kingdom acceded to the New York Convention on 24 Sept 1975 and it came into force on 23 Dec 1975.</para>
						</footnote> Hong Kong formally adopted the New York Convention in April 1977 and it was formally incorporated into the Arbitration Ordinance in 1975. The PRC acceded to the New York Convention on 22 January 1987. Accordingly, Hong Kong continues to be a party to the New York Convention following its return to Chinese sovereignty on 1 July 1997.<footnote num="5">
							<para>The return to Chinese sovereignty did, however, raise a problem regarding enforcement between Hong Kong SAR and Mainland China, as Hong Kong SAR was no longer a separate party from Mainland China under the New York Convention. This problem was resolved by a subsequent Memorandum of Understanding and amendment to the Arbitration Ordinance discussed at para.5.041 below.</para>
						</footnote> Parties to the New York Convention are also specified in the Arbitration (Parties to New York Convention) Order.<footnote num="6">
							<para>(Cap.341A) enacted on 7 June 1985.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>The UNCITRAL Model Law</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.008</phrase> The UNCITRAL Model Law was adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on 21 June 1985. It was incorporated into Hong Kong law in 1989 by virtue of the Arbitration (Amendment) (No.2) Ordinance 1989, and the full text of the UNCITRAL Model Law is set out in the Fifth Schedule to the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341).<footnote num="7">
							<para>Note, however, that it applies to all international arbitrations in Hong Kong, not only &#x201C;commercial&#x201D; ones.</para>
						</footnote> Under the previous Ordinance (Cap.341) there was a distinction between two separate systems which governed domestic and international arbitrations. While international arbitrations were regulated by rules based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, domestic arbitrations were arbitrated under a regime that was based on the various English Arbitration Acts that were developed over the years. This &#x201C;dual-track&#x201D; arbitration system was regarded as confusing and in many occasions those not familiar with the system found it complicated to comprehend, often giving rise to problems over which regime would govern a particular dispute. The new law (Cap.609) abolishes this distinction and replaces it with a unified system in which the UNCITRAL Model Law (with certain specified adaptations catered for cases pertaining to local construction disputes) applies to all arbitrations. Thus making Hong Kong a truly &#x201C;UNCITRAL Model Law jurisdiction&#x201D;.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.009</phrase> The aim of the UNCITRAL Model Law is to promote harmonisation and uniformity of national laws regarding international arbitration procedures. It achieves this by establishing procedural rules &#x201C;by which international commercial arbitrations can be conducted with a minimal degree of judicial intervention and a significant degree of party autonomy.&#x201D;<footnote num="8">
							<para>Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators Draft Report of Committee on Hong Kong Arbitration Law [For Consultation] June 2002, p.9.</para>
						</footnote> The UNCITRAL Model Law was proposed in order to try to address problems encountered by foreign parties when arbitrating in different jurisdictions with vastly differing legal regimes. It was noted that foreign parties trying to select a venue for international arbitration had difficulty both in determining the extent to which the court of a particular jurisdiction could assist or interfere with the arbitral process and in obtaining sufficient information to assess how a particular system worked. This presented an obstacle for those countries which were not traditional venues for arbitration, as the lack of transparency meant that foreign parties were less likely to choose to arbitrate there. After the draft was produced in 1985, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed a resolution that &#x201C;[a]ll States give due consideration to the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, in view of the desirability of uniformity of the law of arbitral procedures and the specific needs of international commercial practice.&#x201D; This resolution has been acted upon by a number of countries over the last 18 years and legislation based on the UNCITRAL Model Law has now been enacted in over 77 States.<footnote num="9">
							<para>As on 26 June 2003, UNCITRAL reported that legislation based on the UNCITRAL Model Law had been enacted in Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bermuda, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hong Kong SAR, Hungary, India, Iran, Ireland, Jordan, Kenya, Lithuania, Macau SAR, Madagascar, Malta, Mexico, New Zealand, Nigeria, Oman, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Ukraine, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Within the United Kingdom: Scotland. Within the United States: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Oregon and Texas.</para>
						</footnote> Some countries have also adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law for domestic arbitrations,<footnote num="10">
							<para>For example, Mexico, Hungary, Egypt, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Guatemala, Brazil, Zimbabwe, New Zealand, Oman and Germany.</para>
						</footnote> a course which was recommended for Hong Kong under the previous law (Cap.341).<footnote num="11">
							<para>See Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators Draft Report of Committee on Hong Kong Arbitration Law [For Consultation] June 2002.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.010</phrase> In addition to incorporating these agreements into Hong Kong law, the legislature also introduced a specific provision into the Arbitration Ordinance directing the arbitral tribunals and courts, when interpreting and applying the provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law in Hong Kong, to have regard to its international origin and the need for uniformity in its application, and authorising them to refer to specified background working papers and discussion papers on the UNCITRAL Model Law.<footnote num="12">
							<para>Arbitration Ordinance, see Appendix, s.2(3) and Sch.6. For further details, see discussion at para.5.003.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
				</section>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(c)">
				<title>Common Law</title>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.011</phrase> While the Arbitration Ordinance provides the framework for arbitration law in Hong Kong, it is further supplemented by the common law and the determinations of the courts of Hong Kong as to application of the Ordinance. Following Hong Kong&#x2019;s return to Chinese sovereignty on 1 July 1997, the common law in force in Hong Kong on 30 June 1997 remains in effect.<footnote num="13">
						<para>Article 8 of the Basic Law.</para>
					</footnote> However, from 1 July 1997 the Courts of Hong Kong SAR are no longer bound to follow English common law precedents<footnote num="14">
						<para>The Application of English Law Ordinance (Cap.188), applied the common law of England and Wales to Hong Kong to the extent it was applicable to Hong Kong and its inhabitants. However, this was not adopted as part of the law of Hong Kong SAR on the basis that it contravened the Basic Law. See the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People&#x2019;s Congress on Treatment of the Laws Previously in Force in Hong Kong in accordance with Basic Law art.160 (23 Feb 1997).</para>
					</footnote> although they may still choose to refer to decisions of other common law jurisdictions when making determinations under the Ordinance. The role of the courts in developing arbitration law is likely to be considerably more limited following amendments to the Ordinance which restrict the ability of the court to intervene in arbitration proceedings. However, it is still envisaged that the courts will have a role in interpreting provisions of the Ordinance, particularly the Model Law (see paras.5.008&#x2013;5.010), and in light of specific provisions allowing for the publication of court orders relating to arbitrations.</para>
			</section>
		</section>
		<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="3.">
			<title>HISTORY OF ARBITRATION LEGISLATION IN HONG KONG</title>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(a)">
				<title>Background</title>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.012</phrase> Arbitration has been promoted as a method of resolving disputes in Hong Kong for the last 160 years. Although the Colony of Hong Kong was formally established in 1842, a colonial system for civil litigation was not put in place immediately. The lack of a proper forum to air and resolve grievances resulted in growing dissatisfaction among the foreign merchants trading in the region, which the then Governor Pottinger dealt with by encouraging parties either to settle their disputes, submit them to arbitration or await the establishment of a Supreme Court in Hong Kong.<footnote num="15">
						<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, &#x201C;Arbitration in Early Hong Kong: 1835&#x2013;1867&#x201D; (Nov 1997) 63 <content-style font-style="italic">Arbitration</content-style> 263, 265.</para>
					</footnote>
				</para>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.013</phrase> Chinese merchants are said to have had their &#x201C;own traditional machinery which allowed them to submit disputes they could not resolve themselves to the adjudication of arbitrators&#x201D;.<footnote num="16">
						<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, <content-style font-style="italic">ibid</content-style>., 266.</para>
					</footnote> This had the benefit of allowing the merchants, where both parties were Chinese, to conduct proceedings in their own language, in private and according to rules they were either familiar with or could at least understand. After the court system was established in Hong Kong, this &#x201C;traditional machinery&#x201D; was still preferred by Chinese merchants. Resorting to litigation was an unattractive prospect because proceedings were always in English, the process was difficult to understand and there was a perception that they were being &#x201C;overcharged by English lawyers&#x201D;.<footnote num="17">
						<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, <content-style font-style="italic">ibid</content-style>., 267.</para>
					</footnote> In part to address these problems, the Government appointed a Registrar-General and &#x201C;Protector of Chinese&#x201D; in 1856 and gave notice to the Chinese community that &#x201C;in all cases in which they have difficulty understanding the law as here administered, or conceive themselves to have wrongs for which they are otherwise unable to obtain redress&#x201D;, they should apply to the appointed Registrar-General, who would then arbitrate in respect of the matter.<footnote num="18">
						<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, <content-style font-style="italic">ibid</content-style>., 266&#x2013;268.</para>
					</footnote> It may be inferred from this that, at least in the early years of the Colony, arbitration probably played an even more significant role for the Chinese community in Hong Kong than it did for the foreign merchants, for whom common law litigation was unlikely to have been as unfamiliar a process.</para>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.014</phrase> It is against this background that this chapter will discuss the various ordinances which have been enacted in Hong Kong relating to arbitration and how the basis of the legislation has shifted from an English law-based system to one more in line with international arbitration principles.</para>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(b)">
				<title>Early Hong Kong arbitration legislation</title>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>Arbitration Ordinance 1844</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.015</phrase> Arbitration is usually the first example given when identifying alternative forms of dispute resolution to litigation. It is ironic, therefore, that Hong Kong&#x2019;s first Arbitration Ordinance<footnote num="19">
							<para>Arbitration Ordinance (No.6 of 1844) passed on 20 Mar 1844.</para>
						</footnote> was passed, not as an alternative to litigation but because there was at the time no colonial civil litigation system in place in the Colony.<footnote num="20">
							<para>The Colony of Hong Kong was established in 1842.</para>
						</footnote> Shortly after the Legislative Council was established, the 1844 Ordinance was passed, purporting to give the governor wide powers to refer all civil disputes to arbitration. This reference was stated to be as effectual as if made by consent and the proceedings deemed to be as if they had been made by a rule of court in England.<footnote num="21">
							<para>Sections 1 and 2.</para>
						</footnote> In addition, any award could be set aside by the governor in the same manner as an award made by a court in England.<footnote num="22">
							<para>Section 3.</para>
						</footnote> The Ordinance was only intended as an interim measure pending the establishment of a proper court system in Hong Kong and expressly provided that the powers granted to the governor would cease upon the arrival in Hong Kong of a judge of a supreme court erected in Hong Kong.<footnote num="23">
							<para>Section 4.</para>
						</footnote> However, the Ordinance was even more short-lived than that. The first exercise of powers under the Ordinance by the incoming Governor attracted public criticism, particularly as the Ordinance had not then been sanctioned by Her Majesty&#x2019;s Government.<footnote num="24">
							<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, &#x201C;Arbitration in Early Hong Kong: 1835&#x2013;1867&#x201D; (Nov 1997) 63 <content-style font-style="italic">Arbitration</content-style> 263, 265, reports that in an arbitration relating to a claim for government compensation for relocation, two arbitrators were appointed who agreed on a value for the property of &#x0024;12,900. Governor Davis then exercised the power under s.3 to reduce the award to &#x0024;8,000 plus various allowances and advised the claimant &#x201C;if this offer be not accepted or acted upon immediately &#x2026;&#x2026;summary proceedings will be adopted by Government in order to gain possession&#x201D;.</para>
						</footnote> This criticism was endorsed when the Colonial Office disallowed the Ordinance on 18 August 1844,<footnote num="25">
							<para>Prof. Derek Roebuck, &#x201C;Arbitration in Early Hong Kong: 1835&#x2013;1867&#x201D; (Nov 1997) 63 <content-style font-style="italic">Arbitration</content-style> 263, 265, notes that the Colonial Office advised the Governor that &#x201C;the Ordinance had been disallowed because it violated: &#x2018;the principles of jurisprudence by which the functions of the Executive and Judicial Authorities ought in every Country and under every system of government to be distinguished from each other&#x2019;&#x201D;.</para>
						</footnote> a week before the enactment of the Supreme Court of Judicature Ordinance 1844<footnote num="26">
							<para>(15 of 1844), which implemented the English Common Law Procedure Act 1854 into the law of Hong Kong.</para>
						</footnote> and several months prior to the first sitting of a chief justice of the Supreme Court in Hong Kong. The latter Ordinance provided that trial by jury be the normal mode for civil trials and that the law of England would be in full force in Hong Kong except where inapplicable to local circumstances.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>Civil Administration of Justice (Amendment) Ordinance 1855</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.016</phrase> The importance of arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution was formally recognised in Hong Kong with the enactment of the Civil Administration of Justice (Amendment) Ordinance 1855.<footnote num="27">
							<para>(6 of 1855).</para>
						</footnote> This Ordinance adopted certain provisions contained in the English Common Law Procedure Acts of 1852 and 1854. The first section of the 1855 Ordinance was entitled &#x201C;Trial without jury&#x2014;arbitration&#x201D;<footnote num="28">
							<para>Sections I to XVI.</para>
						</footnote> and contained provisions dealing with arbitration by agreement as well as compulsory reference to arbitration by the court. The court was empowered to refer matters to arbitration where it appeared to the court that the matter in dispute consisted &#x201C;wholly or partly of matters of mere account&#x201D; which could not conveniently be tried before it.<footnote num="29">
							<para>Sections II and V.</para>
						</footnote> As part of this early arbitration legislation, the High Court was granted a number of supervisory powers, including: the power to stay legal proceedings and refer them to arbitration where an arbitration agreement had been entered into;<footnote num="30">
							<para>Section X.</para>
						</footnote> the power to remit matters to an arbitrator for reconsideration and re-determination;<footnote num="31">
							<para>Section VII.</para>
						</footnote> the power to set aside an award made by compulsory reference;<footnote num="32">
							<para>Section VIII.</para>
						</footnote> and the power to appoint an arbitrator if either party failed to do so, or an appointed arbitrator refused to act, became incapable, or died, or if two arbitrators failed to appoint an umpire.<footnote num="33">
							<para>Sections XI to XIII.</para>
						</footnote> It was also possible for an arbitrator, or the court itself in the course of an arbitration, to direct that a special case be stated for determination by the court, the findings of which were to be taken as final and conclusive by the arbitrator.<footnote num="34">
							<para>Sections III and IV.</para>
						</footnote> The Ordinance also imposed a time limit within which all awards had to be issued, being within three months of the arbitrator&#x2019;s appointment or such further time as agreed by the parties or directed by the court.<footnote num="35">
							<para>Section XIV.</para>
						</footnote> This system represented the first real framework for arbitration in Hong Kong and was to remain in place in Hong Kong for the next 46 years.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iii)">
					<title>Code of Civil Procedure 1901</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.017</phrase> Despite amendments to Hong Kong&#x2019;s civil procedure legislation over the years,<footnote num="36">
							<para>Between 1855 and 1901, amendments to the civil procedure legislation were effected in the form of the Supreme Court Ordinance 1873 (12 of 1873) and Hong Kong Code of Civil Procedure Ordinance 1873 (13 of 1873). The latter Ordinance was also repealed by the introduction of the Code of Civil Procedure Ordinance 1901 (5 of 1901).</para>
						</footnote> the relevant arbitration provisions remained unchanged until the 1855 Ordinance was repealed by the introduction of the Code of Civil Procedure Ordinance 1901 (the 1901 Code).<footnote num="37">
							<para>(5 of 1901).</para>
						</footnote> The 1901 Code incorporated provisions relating to arbitration under Chapter XXIV,<footnote num="38">
							<para>Sections 538&#x2013;564 contain provisions relating to arbitration.</para>
						</footnote> which were based on provisions in the English Arbitration Act 1889. Although many of these provisions were similar to those under the 1855 Ordinance, Chapter XXIV of the 1901 Code expanded on the previous law of arbitration in Hong Kong by introducing nine provisions<footnote num="39">
							<para>Section 540.</para>
						</footnote> that were deemed to be included in any reference to arbitration, unless expressly excluded, as well as setting out powers of the arbitrator and procedure on reference.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.018</phrase> The implied provisions included: that reference would be to a single arbitrator if no other mode of reference was provided; that if reference was to two arbitrators an umpire could be appointed; that a time limit of three months from date of reference to issue of the award applied; that parties were to submit to arbitrators on oath and produce all documents in their possession or power and do all things which the arbitrator may have required; that witnesses were to be examined on oath; that the award would be final and binding; and that costs of reference would be in the discretion of the arbitrator. The stated procedure on reference<footnote num="40">
							<para>Section 544(2).</para>
						</footnote> authorised the arbitrator to determine the venue and time of arbitration, request inspections as necessary, take evidence and conduct proceedings in the same manner as the court and order discovery and production of documents in the same manner as the court. As can be seen later in this text, many of these provisions still exist in a similar form as provisions in the present Arbitration Ordinance.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.019</phrase> The 1901 Code further confirmed the importance of continued use of arbitration in Hong Kong, by providing that an agreement to arbitrate was irrevocable, except by leave of the court, and had the same effect as if it had been made by order of the court.<footnote num="41">
							<para>This went further than a similar provision in the 1855 Ordinance which provided that an agreement to arbitrate may be made a rule of Court on the application of any party: sec.XVI 1855 Ordinance.</para>
						</footnote> Chapter XXIV provisions were also applicable to every arbitration under any Ordinance in Hong Kong.<footnote num="42">
							<para>Section 564.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.020</phrase> The court retained the supervisory powers granted under the 1855 Ordinance and was also given express power to remove an arbitrator for misconduct and to set aside any arbitration award. The extent of the court&#x2019;s supervisory involvement was to remain a feature of arbitrations in Hong Kong for most of the next century. Provisions relating to compulsory reference to arbitration were maintained under a separate sub-section of Chapter XXIV in a slightly different form. They empowered the court to refer questions for inquiry or special report, where the questions consisted wholly, or in part, of matters of account, or the matter required prolonged examination of documents or scientific or local investigation which could not be conveniently dealt with by the court.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.021</phrase> The 1901 Code was repealed in 1950 by the Supreme Court (Amendment) Ordinance. This did not affect the law of arbitration in Hong Kong, however, as the provisions relating to arbitration set out in Chapter XXIV of the 1901 Code were re-enacted as Chapter XXV of the 1950 Ordinance.</para>
				</section>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(c)">
				<title>Background to the modern Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance</title>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>Arbitration Ordinance 1963</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.022</phrase> The basis for the modern Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341) can be found in the Arbitration Ordinance 1963. This Ordinance repealed the former Chapter XXV and introduced a comprehensive piece of arbitration legislation based on the English Arbitration Act 1950. The Ordinance contained provisions applicable to both domestic and international arbitrations, most of which remain in force in the form of the present Arbitration Ordinance.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.023</phrase> With the enactment of the 1963 Ordinance, the court maintained a role in the arbitral process, although this was more limited in the case of international arbitrations. It retained discretion to stay court proceedings where there was a domestic arbitration agreement, but if the arbitration agreement was international, a stay was mandatory. Other provisions gave the court power to hear appeals on questions of law, determine preliminary points by consent, remove an arbitrator who was guilty of misconduct and give relief where an arbitrator was not impartial or the dispute involved questions of fraud.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>Amendments to the Arbitration Ordinance 1963</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.024</phrase> Although the 1963 Ordinance forms the basis of the present Arbitration Ordinance, it was the introduction of a number of later amendments to the 1963 Ordinance which were instrumental in transforming Hong Kong&#x2019;s arbitration law from an English law-based system to one which placed more emphasis on the international law of arbitration and provided the legislative framework to support Hong Kong&#x2019;s development into an international forum for arbitration. These amendments and the background to these amendments, where relevant, are discussed below.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iii)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1975<footnote num="43">
							<para>(No.85 of 1975). Note, however, the amendment did not take effect until Apr 1977.</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.025</phrase> In 1975, the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention)<footnote num="44">
							<para>See the previous discussion of the New York Convention at para.5.006.</para>
						</footnote> was incorporated into the 1963 Ordinance by virtue of this Ordinance.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iv)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1982<footnote num="45">
							<para>(No.10 of 1982).</para>
						</footnote> and the 1981 Report on Commercial Arbitration</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.026</phrase> In 1982, further amendments were introduced which brought into law recommendations made by the Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong (the Commission) in their 1981 Report on Commercial Arbitration. The recommendations adopted a number of amendments which had been introduced in England by the Arbitration Act 1979, although not all amendments were considered appropriate to be adopted for use in Hong Kong. Those that were considered appropriate were intended to remove opportunities for parties to delay arbitration proceedings and the enforcement of awards, as well as to address other concerns regarding the adequacy of existing arbitration provisions, in light of problems encountered by the English regarding enforcement of the English arbitration legislation.<footnote num="46">
							<para>Note that due to the limited number of arbitrations then being conducted in Hong Kong, the Law Commission concluded that Hong Kong&#x2019;s own legislative provisions were &#x201C;untested&#x201D; and would prove to be unsatisfactory if put to extensive use: Report on Commercial Arbitration, para.93.</para>
						</footnote> Recommended amendments, which were effected by the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1982, included:</para>
					<orderedlist type="manual">
						<item num="(1)">
							<para>abolishing the system of judicial review by special case-stated procedure and limiting the right of appeal to circumstances where leave was obtained from the court;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(2)">
							<para>conferring on the arbitrator the power to proceed with the arbitration in default of appearance by any of the parties where ordered by the court;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(3)">
							<para>conferring on the court the power to strike out claims in cases of delay where the interests of justice so required;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(4)">
							<para>enabling parties to contract out of the judicial review provisions after a dispute had arisen;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(5)">
							<para>providing that, on a reference to three arbitrators, the award of any two would be binding;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(6)">
							<para>enabling the court to consolidate two or more arbitration proceedings; and</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(7)">
							<para>enabling judges, magistrates and public officers to accept appointment as arbitrators.</para>
						</item>
					</orderedlist>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.027</phrase> Miscellaneous other reforms were also recommended. In particular, O.73 of the Rules of the High Court was amended to include a procedure for making payments into court in connection with arbitration proceedings.<footnote num="47">
							<para>Order 73 r.11.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.028</phrase> These recommendations reflected the Commission&#x2019;s recognition that where parties choose to arbitrate, it is desirable that the laws and practices in Hong Kong allow their needs to be met and that their choice to arbitrate not be frustrated by inflexible rules of law or procedure.<footnote num="48">
							<para>Report on Commercial Arbitration, para.3.1.</para>
						</footnote> The Commission considered these reforms would &#x201C;accord with the needs of the local and international community&#x201D; and &#x201C;provide a sound legislative framework for arbitration in Hong Kong&#x201D;.<footnote num="49">
							<para>
								<content-style font-style="italic">Ibid</content-style>., para.10.32.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.029</phrase> As part of its review, the Commission considered and made recommendations as to ways in which Hong Kong could best develop its potential to be a leading arbitration centre in Asia. The need to have the right legislative framework in place was clearly recognised. At the time, however, Hong Kong was seen to be lacking more basic resources, in particular the lack of a central body to facilitate arbitrations in Hong Kong and an insufficient number of experienced arbitrators. A survey conducted by the Commission in 1980 revealed that &#x201C;the average number of arbitrations in Hong Kong in the last three years (1978&#x2013;1980) was only 14 per annum&#x201D;<footnote num="50">
							<para>
								<content-style font-style="italic">Ibid</content-style>., para.4.8.</para>
						</footnote> with an additional 5 or 6 per annum estimated. The Commission concluded that the reason why there were so few arbitrations in Hong Kong was a lack of prepared arbitration facilities. Although a number of organisations and individuals in Hong Kong were then providing arbitration services,<footnote num="51">
							<para>Including the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Hong Kong Maritime and Law Association and various members of the Bar.</para>
						</footnote> there was no central body to undertake a central facilitation role and to provide the necessary support services, such as secretarial assistance and provision of translators (particularly important for international arbitrations). There was also perceived to be a lack of experienced arbitrators in Hong Kong, forcing the Commission to conclude that &#x201C;many of the possible advantages of arbitration, such as the choice of a tribunal which is expert and experienced in the particular type of dispute, thus promoting speed and cost-saving, cannot be achieved in Hong Kong.&#x201D;<footnote num="52">
							<para>Report on Commercial Arbitration, para.5.2.</para>
						</footnote> By way of practical reforms, the Commission recommended that prepared arbitration facilities be provided through private institutions, that tertiary institutions in Hong Kong consider teaching arbitration law and practice and that the government review impediments existing to overseas experts conducting and appearing in arbitration proceedings in Hong Kong. The foremost of those recommendations was realised in 1985 with the establishment of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) (see para.5.058). The lack of experienced arbitrators was in part addressed by the amendment enabling judges and other public officers to accept appointments as arbitrators in Hong Kong.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(v)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1984<footnote num="53">
							<para>(No.17 of 1984).</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.030</phrase> This empowered arbitrators to award interest on sums paid late.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(vi)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1989<footnote num="54">
							<para>(No.31 of 1989).</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.031</phrase> The Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1989 was introduced because some confusion had arisen as to whether, in light of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance (Cap.159), only qualified barristers and solicitors could represent parties in arbitrations in Hong Kong. It expressly provides that ss.44, 45 and 47 of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, which restrict persons not qualified as barristers and solicitors from practising as such in Hong Kong, do not apply to arbitration proceedings or to any advice given or things done in connection with arbitration proceedings, except where court proceedings are involved. This confirmed the common law position that a party in an arbitration may be represented by any person of his or her choosing whatever their profession and from whatever legal jurisdiction.<footnote num="55">
							<para>Report from Second Reading of Arbitration (Amendment) Bill 1989 (Hong Kong Legislative Council &#x2014;28 June 1999).</para>
						</footnote> This provision is described as having made Hong Kong &#x201C;one of the most laissez-faire arbitration regimes in South East Asia&#x201D;.<footnote num="56">
							<para>Morgan, Robert, &#x201C;<content-style font-style="italic">The Arbitration Ordinance of Hong Kong&#x2014;A Commentary</content-style>&#x201D; (Butterworths Asia, 1997), 20, fn 36.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(vii)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) (No.2) Ordinance 1989 and report on adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.032</phrase> In September 1987, the Commission published a report on the Adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law of Arbitration, which recommended the adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law<footnote num="57">
							<para>See background discussion to the Model Law at paras.5.008&#x2013;5.010.</para>
						</footnote> for international arbitrations in Hong Kong, along with other amendments to ensure consistency with the Model Law. These recommendations were accepted by the Government, and were enacted into law in November 1989 by virtue of the Arbitration (Amendment) (No.2) Ordinance.<footnote num="58">
							<para>(No.64 of 1989) which became operative on 6 Apr 1990.</para>
						</footnote> Articles 35 and 36 of the Model Law, relating to the recognition and enforcement of awards, were not applicable, however, due to Hong Kong&#x2019;s accession to the New York Convention. Other amendments brought into effect include enabling parties to international agreements to opt for arbitration under the domestic regime<footnote num="59">
							<para>Section 2M of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341). See Appendix.</para>
						</footnote> and empowering the arbitrator to award interest and costs.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.033</phrase> The adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law, incorporated as the Fifth Schedule to the Arbitration Ordinance, represented an important shift away from an English law-based arbitration system to one based on international law. The Commission&#x2019;s reasons for recommending incorporation were five-fold and can be summarised as follows:<footnote num="60">
							<para>1987 Report of Hong Kong Law Reform Commission on Adoption of UNCITRAL Model Law, para.1.9.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<orderedlist type="manual">
						<item num="(1)">
							<para>the UNCITRAL Model Law was seen to provide a sound framework within which international arbitrations could be conducted;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(2)">
							<para>great benefit could be gained for Hong Kong in its growing role as a centre for international arbitrations;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(3)">
							<para>as the UNCITRAL Model Law gave more autonomy to the arbitrator, this would be likely to appeal more to lawyers and parties who were not familiar with English concepts of arbitration;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(4)">
							<para>if the UNCITRAL Model Law were adopted widely, it would encourage international arbitration as a way of settling commercial disputes, which in turn would work to Hong Kong&#x2019;s advantage as a leading commercial centre in Asia; and</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(5)">
							<para>as the UNCITRAL Model Law was drafted in the languages of the United Nations, as a framework incorporated into Hong Kong law, it would be accessible to foreign parties in all countries.</para>
						</item>
					</orderedlist>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.034</phrase> These reasons underscore the Commission&#x2019;s general aim to amend the legislation in such a way as to make Hong Kong a more attractive and viable forum in which foreign parties could choose to arbitrate international disputes. The Commission hoped at the time that Hong Kong would be &#x201C;in the vanguard&#x201D; in adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law.<footnote num="61">
							<para>1987 Report of Hong Kong Law Reform Commission on Adoption of UNCITRAL Model Law, para.1.9(d).</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.035</phrase> The Commission also considered modifying parts of the UNCITRAL Model Law in order to clarify certain provisions which it considered were ambiguous and subject to interpretation.<footnote num="62">
							<para>
								<content-style font-style="italic">Ibid</content-style>., paras.4.9, pp.19&#x2013;27.</para>
						</footnote> In the end, however, it rejected any modification of the UNCITRAL Model Law, save for one deletion, as it was concerned that any redrafting of the UNCITRAL Model Law in the style of the Hong Kong statutes would &#x201C;detract from the recognisability of the UNCITRAL Model Law&#x201D;.<footnote num="63">
							<para>
								<content-style font-style="italic">Ibid</content-style>., para.4.25.</para>
						</footnote> Instead, it retained the original language of the UNCITRAL Model Law but made a recommendation that its report be referred to should any interpretation and application issues later arise. In addition to recommending its incorporation, the Commission also recommended that one deletion and four additions be made to the UNCITRAL Model Law before it was incorporated into the Ordinance:</para>
					<orderedlist type="manual">
						<item num="(1)">
							<para>The one deletion recommended by the Commission was to delete the word &#x201C;commercial&#x201D; from the phrase &#x201C;international commercial arbitration&#x201D; as it appears in the UNCITRAL Model Law. This modification was recommended in order to give the law its widest possible scope and enable the law to be applied to all international arbitrations&#x2014;not just commercial ones (although the definition of commercial under the UNCITRAL Model Law is itself fairly broad). This recommendation was enacted as s.34C(2) of the Arbitration Ordinance.</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(2)">
							<para>The Commission also recommended that a special provision be added, specifically permitting the courts to consider certain specified documents when interpreting the law. Due to the fact that the Commission considered a number of provisions in the UNCITRAL Model Law to be ambiguous, they felt it would be of assistance to the court, if questions of interpretation arose, to have regard to the official working papers of the UNCITRAL working group (travaux preparatoires) and certain other documents. As a result, an amendment was introduced<footnote num="64">
									<para>Arbitration Ordinance, s.2(3). See Appendix.</para>
								</footnote> stating that in interpreting and applying the provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law, regard should be had to its international origin, the need for uniformity in its interpretation and the documents specified in the Sixth Schedule, being: (i) the report of the Secretary-General dated 25 March 1985 entitled &#x201C;Analytical Commentary on draft text of a Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration&#x201D;;<footnote num="65">
									<para>United Nations document A/CN 9/264, 26 Mar 1985.</para>
								</footnote> (ii) the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its 18th session;<footnote num="66">
									<para>United Nations document A/40/17, 3&#x2013;21 June 1985.</para>
								</footnote> and (iii) the Commission Report on the Adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law.</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(3)">
							<para>Additional provisions protecting the confidentiality of the parties and the arbitration proceedings were also recommended. The Commission considered that all proceedings under the Ordinance in the High Court or the Court of Appeal should, on the application of any party, be held otherwise than in open court. It was further recommended that the court be given the power to forbid publication of information in relation to such proceedings, thus making any breach a contempt of court. Similar protections had been promoted in the earlier report of the Commission. These recommendations have been enacted in the form of ss.2D and 2E of the Arbitration Ordinance.</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(4)">
							<para>The third addition proposed was the extension of conciliation provisions, which are often preferred in China, to both domestic and international arbitrations.<footnote num="67">
									<para>Adopted by amendment to s.2A and inclusion of s.2B of the Arbitration Ordinance.</para>
								</footnote>
							</para>
						</item>
					</orderedlist>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.036</phrase> The fourth and final recommendation was that provision be made for permanent funding of the HKIAC and formal recognition of the centre as part of Hong Kong&#x2019;s arbitration law on the basis that this may assist its image and reputation as a Hong Kong institution, which would then be nominated in arbitration clauses. This particular recommendation was not specifically incorporated as part of the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance (No.2) 1989, however, the status of the HKIAC as a central arbitration body in Hong Kong was recognised by later provisions in the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1996.<footnote num="68">
							<para>See paras.5.038 to 5.040.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(viii)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1991<footnote num="69">
							<para>(56 of 1991).</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.037</phrase> This amendment confirmed that the right to seek the assistance of the High Court in relation to interim relief and evidence was applicable to international arbitrations as well as domestic arbitrations.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ix)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1996 (Cap.341)<footnote num="70">
							<para>(75 of 1996) which became operative on 27 June 1997.</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.038</phrase> The Arbitration Ordinance was further amended in 1997 following the enactment of the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1996, save for two later amendments<footnote num="71">
							<para>See para.5.039 regarding developments post 1997.</para>
						</footnote> which completed the transformation of the 1963 Ordinance into the present Arbitration Ordinance. This took effect on 27 June 1997 shortly before 1 July 1997, when Hong Kong reverted to the sovereignty of the People&#x2019;s Republic of China. This represented a further important change in the direction of arbitration law in Hong Kong, as new provisions were introduced in order to give parties greater autonomy with respect to the arbitral process and to restrict the extent to which the court could intervene in arbitration proceedings. This was a decided change from the supervisory role which the court had historically undertaken in Hong Kong, but consistent with the objective of making Hong Kong more attractive as an international forum by limiting court intervention in the arbitral process. The amendments effected were identified by the Committee on Hong Kong Arbitration Law in a 1996 Report as being urgently required, with more fundamental reforms being recommended for the longer term.<footnote num="72">
							<para>
								<content-style font-style="italic">Ibid</content-style>.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.039</phrase> The 1996 Amendment Ordinance introduced a new provision specifically setting out the object and principles of the Ordinance.<footnote num="73">
							<para>See Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators Draft Report of Committee on Hong Kong Arbitration Law [For Consultation], June 2002.</para>
						</footnote> The stated object is to facilitate the fair and speedy resolution of disputes by arbitration without unnecessary expenses.<footnote num="74">
							<para>Section 2AA.</para>
						</footnote> The stated principles are that parties to a dispute should be free to agree how the dispute should be resolved, subject to the observance of such safeguards as are necessary in the public interest, and that the court should only interfere in the arbitration of the dispute as provided for in the Ordinance.<footnote num="75">
							<para>Section 2AA(1).</para>
						</footnote> These statements form the background to the further amendments which included the following:</para>
					<orderedlist type="manual">
						<item num="(1)">
							<para>providing for the Ordinance to only apply to arbitration agreements in writing<footnote num="76">
									<para>Section 2AA(2).</para>
								</footnote> while at the same time providing a broad list of examples which would satisfy this requirement, including the exchange of written communications and that the agreement be contained in a document, whether signed or not;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(2)">
							<para>adding new expanded provisions dealing with the conduct of the proceedings,<footnote num="77">
									<para>Section 2AC: oral arbitration agreements and proceedings based on oral arbitration agreements are governed by the common law.</para>
								</footnote> including:</para>
							<orderedlist type="manual">
								<item num="(a)">
									<para>stating the general responsibilities of the arbitral tribunal. These require the arbitral tribunal to act fairly and impartially between the parties and give them a reasonable opportunity to present their cases, as well as to apply procedures appropriate to each case, to avoid unnecessary delay and expense and to provide a fair means for resolving each dispute;<footnote num="78">
											<para>Sections 2GA to 2GN.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
								<item num="(b)">
									<para>specifying the powers of the arbitral tribunal and the High Court to order various forms of interim relief in relation to arbitration proceedings, including ordering security for costs and interim injunctions;<footnote num="79">
											<para>Section 2GA.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
								<item num="(c)">
									<para>confirming that an arbitral tribunal may award any remedy which could be ordered by the court and that its awards may be enforced in the same way as an order of the court;<footnote num="80">
											<para>Sections 2GB and 2GC.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
								<item num="(d)">
									<para>restating the tribunal&#x2019;s powers in relation to ordering costs, confirming that an arbitral tribunal may award interest at simple or compound rate and empowering the arbitral tribunal to limit recoverable costs;<footnote num="81">
											<para>Sections 2GF and 2GG.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
								<item num="(e)">
									<para>providing that parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the fees of the tribunal;<footnote num="82">
											<para>Sections 2GJ, 2GH and 2GL.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
								<item num="(f)">
									<para>granting immunity for arbitrators and appointers, save where any act or omission is proved to have been done dishonestly;<footnote num="83">
											<para>Section 2GK.</para>
										</footnote>
									</para>
								</item>
							</orderedlist>
						</item>
						<item num="(3)">
							<para>conferring powers on the HKIAC to appoint an arbitrator or umpire in place of the court,<footnote num="84">
									<para>Sections 2GM and 2GN.</para>
								</footnote> to perform certain functions under the Model Law and to determine the number of arbitrators under international agreements in the event of dispute between the parties;<footnote num="85">
									<para>This recognition of the HKIAC&#x2019;s status endorsed the recommendation made by the Commission in its Sept 1987 Report on Adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law.</para>
								</footnote>
							</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(4)">
							<para>reducing the powers formerly exercisable by the courts and granting the tribunal extended powers, including the power to rule on whether it had any jurisdiction in relation to domestic arbitration agreements.<footnote num="86">
									<para>Section 34C(3).</para>
								</footnote> See also Chapter 9.</para>
						</item>
					</orderedlist>
				</section>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(d)">
				<title>Developments post-June 1997</title>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>Effect of handover on arbitration law</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.040</phrase> On 1 July 1997, Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty (the handover) and ceased to be a member of the British Commonwealth. It is now designated as a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People&#x2019;s Republic of China (PRC). Since 1 July 1997, Hong Kong&#x2019;s legal regime has been governed by the Basic Law, a constitutional document adopted by the Seventh National People&#x2019;s Congress of the PRC on 4 April 1990. Article 8 of the Basic Law provides that laws previously in force in Hong Kong are maintained in force, save for any which contravene the Basic Law and subject to any amendment by the legislature of Hong Kong SAR. For the purposes of this chapter, this means that relevant ordinances, including the Arbitration Ordinance, and the common law remained in effect in Hong Kong despite the change of sovereignty. The change did have one impact on arbitration law in Hong Kong, however, as the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty meant that Hong Kong was no longer a separate party from China for the purposes of the New York Convention. As such, it was not possible for an arbitral award in Mainland China to be directly enforced in Hong Kong under the New York Convention and vice versa after 30 June 1997. (see para.16.025).</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>The Memorandum of Understanding and Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 2000<footnote num="87">
							<para>Section 13B.</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.041</phrase> Although the problem of enforcing awards between Hong Kong and Mainland China after 1 July 1997 was recognised before the handover, it was not until 21 June 1999 that any formal steps were agreed on to address this problem. On 21 June 1999, the authorities in Mainland China and Hong Kong SAR signed a Memorandum of Understanding entitled the &#x201C;Arrangement concerning Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong SAR.&#x201D; The agreement is described as reflecting the &#x201C;spirit of the New York Convention&#x201D;<footnote num="88">
							<para>(2 of 2000).</para>
						</footnote> and confirmed that in accordance with art.95 of the Basic Law,<footnote num="89">
							<para>Legislative Council Brief, Arbitration (Amendment) Bill 1999 (File ref: CSO/ADM CR/1/3221/87 (99)).</para>
						</footnote> the courts of Hong Kong SAR agree to enforce awards made pursuant to the arbitration law of the PRC by the arbitral authorities, and the People&#x2019;s courts of the Mainland agree to enforce awards made in Hong Kong under the Arbitration Ordinance. It also specified arrangements to be made by Hong Kong and Mainland China to effect this mutual enforcement. This agreement was incorporated into Hong Kong law by virtue of the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 2000,<footnote num="90">
							<para>Article 95 permits Hong Kong SAR to maintain juridical relations with the judicial organs of other parts of China and render assistance to each other.</para>
						</footnote> which repealed sections of the Arbitration Ordinance and replaced them with Pt III, ss.40A&#x2013;40G. Section 40B provides that a Mainland award shall be enforceable either by action in court or in the same manner as the award of an arbitrator enforceable by virtue of s.2GG and shall be treated as binding. Subsequent sections set out the evidence required to enforce a Mainland award<footnote num="91">
							<para>(No.2 of 2000).</para>
						</footnote> and circumstances in which enforcement of a Mainland award is restricted or may be refused.<footnote num="92">
							<para>Section 40D.</para>
						</footnote> A saving provision is also included under s.40G, allowing enforcement of Mainland awards which may have been refused enforcement during the period from 1 July 1997, when the New York Convention ceased to apply, and 1 February 2000, being the date when the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 2000 commenced.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iii)">
					<title>Arbitration (Amendment) (No.2) Ordinance 2000</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.042</phrase> This Ordinance introduced an amendment to s.2GG, which provided that decisions of arbitral tribunals are enforceable in the same way as a judgment of the court if leave of the court is obtained. The amendment confirmed that s.2GG applies to awards, orders or directions made or given whether in or outside Hong Kong.<footnote num="93">
							<para>Sections 40C and 40E.</para>
						</footnote> This express clarification was considered necessary following a decision of the Court of First Instance in Hong Kong in which s.2GG was held to apply only to awards in Hong Kong. This meant that, but for the amendment, awards made other than on the Mainland or by a party to the New York Convention would not be summarily enforceable in Hong Kong. The effect of this amendment is that awards made in non-Convention countries may be summarily enforceable with leave of the court.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iv)">
					<title>Arbitration Ordinance 2010 (Cap. 609)<footnote num="94">
							<para>Operative on 1 June 2011.</para>
						</footnote>
					</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.043</phrase> In June 2002, the Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators published the Draft Report of the Committee on Hong Kong Arbitration Law for consultation, which recommended a unitary regime be implemented adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law for both domestic and international arbitrations. It also endorsed the proposal of a previous committee to completely redraw the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.341) in order to apply the UNCITRAL Model Law equally to both domestic and international arbitrations. The terms of reference of the Committee were to carry forward recommendations made by an earlier committee in 1996. These recommendations, which provide a good summary of the purpose behind the recommendations, were to the effect that:</para>
					<extract>
						<para>&#x201C;the Arbitration Ordinance, Cap.341, as amended by the [Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance (No.75 of 1996)], should be completely redrawn in order to apply the [UNCITRAL] Model Law equally to both domestic and international arbitrations, and arbitration agreements, together with such additional provisions as are deemed, in light of experience in Hong Kong and other [UNCITRAL] Model Law jurisdictions, both necessary and desirable. In the process the legislation would keep pace with the needs of the modern community domestically and globally, and would free Hong Kong from the outdated and illogically arranged English Arbitration Acts [1950&#x2013;1979, now repealed], and the large body of case law on which their interpretation depends.&#x201D;</para>
					</extract>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.044</phrase> The Draft Report went on to make detailed recommendations regarding the restructuring of the Arbitration Ordinance and the amendment of particular sections in order to ensure consistency with the UNCITRAL Model Law. After a consultation period ending in February 2003, the Committee published its final Report confirming its recommendation of a unitary regime for the distinction between domestic and international arbitrations to be abolished but noted that for the most part, the general provisions, at present applicable to all arbitrations, should continue to apply. The Report was then submitted to the Government in which the Department of Justice set up a Working Group to examine the proposals in September 2005. In December 2007, the Department of Justice published a Consultation Paper on Reform of the Law of Arbitration in Hong Kong and draft Arbitration Bill (Consultation Paper) to seek views on the proposed reform. There was in principle general support in the submissions received on the proposal to abolish the distinction between domestic and international arbitration under the then Arbitration Ordinance. The domestic regime was mainly based on the English Arbitration Acts and the international regime was based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. Instead, a unitary regime of arbitration based on the UNCITRAL Model Law is to be adopted.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.045</phrase> The new law (Cap.609) came into effect on 1 June 2011. Under s.1 of Sch.3 of the new law, the current Ordinance (Cap.341) will apply to all arbitrations and related proceedings commenced prior to 1 June 2011 whereas the new law will apply to all arbitrations and related proceedings commenced on or after the 1 June 2011.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.046</phrase> The new law aims to streamline the administration of the Hong Kong arbitration process by abolishing the distinction between domestic and international arbitrations prevailing under the current Ordinance. Under the new law, there will be a single unitary regime based on the widely used UNCITRAL Model Law and its internationally recognised principles.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.047</phrase> The UNCITRAL Model Law, which previously applied only to international arbitrations, will now apply to all arbitrations commenced in Hong Kong. This user-friendly regime will make the administration of arbitration proceedings in Hong Kong more efficient and will provide greater certainty for both domestic and foreign parties in respect of issues such as procedural fairness and ease of enforcement in non-New York Convention jurisdictions.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.048</phrase> One of the key features of the new law is the notion of minimal court intervention, with provisions of the new law vesting as much power as possible with the arbitral tribunals. Adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law&#x2019;s provisions regarding interim measures, arbitral tribunals seated in Hong Kong are able to grant temporary measures, for example, to preserve assets or evidence, or to maintain or restore the <content-style font-style="italic">status quo</content-style>&#x2014;as well as the power of the granting of injunctions. In addition, arbitral tribunals can award preliminary orders preventing parties from frustrating any interim measure.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.049</phrase> Separately, arbitral tribunals seated in Hong Kong are empowered <content-style font-style="italic">inter alia</content-style> to award security for costs and direct the discovery of documents or delivery of interrogatories&#x2014;retaining the &#x201C;general powers&#x201D; of an arbitral tribunal provided under the previous regime. Moreover, and an important feature of the new law, arbitral tribunals may make peremptory orders, which in other jurisdictions are a useful but underused resource of arbitral tribunals, specifying time limits for parties&#x2019; compliance in order to assist with the enforcement of their orders or directions.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.050</phrase> Section 45 of the Ordinance also empowers the Hong Kong Courts to grant certain interim measures in support of arbitral proceedings&#x2014;whether seated in Hong Kong or not&#x2014;albeit that the Courts may decline to grant such relief if it is considered more appropriate for the interim measure sought to be granted by the arbitral tribunal. Furthermore, the Hong Kong Courts may only grant interim measures in support of proceedings seated outside of Hong Kong if: (a) the arbitral proceedings are capable of giving rise to an arbitral award which may be enforced in Hong Kong; and (b) the interim measure sought belongs to a type or description of interim measure which may be granted in Hong Kong.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.051</phrase> In essence the new law offers more certainty regarding the scope of the powers exercisable by an arbitral tribunal by setting out in detail such powers, including the ordering of security for costs, the directing of discovery of documents, that evidence be given by affidavit and for the inspection of relevant property, amongst other matters.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.052</phrase> Mediation being a key component of Hong Kong&#x2019;s Civil Justice Reforms (CJR) since April 2009, have far and large been accepted by the community. Under the CJR, lawyers have a duty to explore whether their client&#x2019;s claims can be resolved by a process other than litigation, namely mediation. In the previous Ordinance (Cap.341) an arbitrator is allowed to act as a conciliator with the parties&#x2019; consent. The new law retains such provisions by replacing the term conciliator with mediator. This procedure does have its problems especially when the mediation fails, the mediator/arbitrator is then required to disclose such confidential information obtained during the mediation which one considers is &#x201C;material to the arbitral proceedings&#x201D;. This concept of &#x201C;arb-med&#x201D; does have its fair share of problems as highlighted by the Hong Kong Courts that arbitration awards may be set aside on grounds of public policy if the &#x201C;arb-med&#x201D; process is conducted in such a manner as to create an impression of bias, as in <case>
							<content-style font-style="italic">Gao Haiyan v Keeneye Holdings Ltd.</content-style>
						</case>
						<footnote num="95">
							<para>
								<case>(Unrep., HCCT41/2010, [2011] HKEC 514)</case>.</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.053</phrase> The new law contains an express duty to keep confidential both the information disclosed during arbitral proceedings and the arbitral award itself, subject to certain limited exceptions; for example, where the disclosure is agreed between the parties, required to protect a party&#x2019;s legal rights, required by a regulatory body, court or tribunal or required to enforce an arbitral award. In conjunction with this express duty, the new law goes one step further than the previous Ordinance (Cap.341); namely, to provide that all arbitration-related court proceedings are to be conducted in private unless the court, in its discretion, on the application of any party or on its own initiative, orders the proceedings to be heard in open court.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.054</phrase> Further, for arbitration agreements entered into before or within six years after the commencement of the new law (1 June 2011) and which specify that the arbitration will be subject to the domestic regime of the current Ordinance, the existing domestic provisions in the current Ordinance as set out in Sch.2 to the new law will be automatically opted-in. They provide for determination of a dispute by a single arbitrator in the absence of agreement, consolidation of arbitrations, the ability of the Court to decide a preliminary question of law and set aside an award on the ground of serious irregularity, and the ability of a party to appeal to the Court on a question of law. Although the Model Law does make provision for an award to be set aside, however, the grounds are limited, they relate mostly to procedural irregularities and do not include errors of law, no matter how serious, which was a concern to those involved with the construction industry in Hong Kong. With such opt-in provisions certain provisions of the previous domestic arbitration have been retained in the new law which addresses some of the concerns raised by the construction industry. In addition, if a construction contract results in an automatic opt-in to Sch.2, then any sub-contract (of any tier) which includes an arbitration agreement will also be deemed to have opted-in automatically. These special deeming provisions do not, however, apply where a sub-contractor is not a Hong Kong company.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.055</phrase> Therefore, if the parties to an arbitration under the domestic regime do not wish to opt-in to the Sch.2 provisions, they should agree in writing, or expressly provide that the automatic opt-in provisions do not apply or indicate which of the provisions in Sch.2 do apply (or which do not).</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.056</phrase> The new law does not adopt the enforcement provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law but takes a similar approach to that under the current regime. Such that an arbitral award is enforceable in the same manner as a court judgment, with the leave of the court. The provisions of the current regime covering awards that are made in a New York Convention state or in Mainland China are retained, recognising Hong Kong&#x2019;s obligations to enforce Convention awards and mainland awards. A new section covering enforcement of awards that are not made in a New York Convention state or in mainland China is added, so that the court is empowered to enforce such awards on a discretionary basis without the need to demonstrate reciprocity.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.057</phrase> With these changes introduced, the new law should serve to further strengthen Hong Kong&#x2019;s stance as a regional centre for dispute resolution.</para>
				</section>
			</section>
		</section>
		<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="4.">
			<title>ARBITRAL INSTITUTIONS</title>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(a)">
				<title>Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)</title>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>Introduction</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.058</phrase> Hong Kong has a modern and effective statutory framework for arbitration and mediation, a supportive judiciary, and a strong infrastructure for the development of the best practices of international alternative dispute resolution (ADR). In addition, there is continuous striving by the professional and business communities in Hong Kong to find better methods for resolving disputes effectively, efficiently and at a reduced cost. All this helps to make Hong Kong an ideal place for conducting arbitrations; and to retain its status as one of the world&#x2019;s leading arbitration centres.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>History and development of the HKIAC</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.059</phrase> The HKIAC was first established in September 1985 by a group of prominent business and professional people in Hong Kong to be the focus in Asia for dispute resolution. It has been generously funded by the business community and by the Hong Kong Government but is completely independent of both.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iii)">
					<title>Structure</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.060</phrase> The HKIAC is a non-profit company limited by guarantee and it enjoys charitable status. It is run by a council composed of a number of individuals of many different nationalities/disciplines who are prominent members of Hong Kong&#x2019;s business and professional communities. Administration/day-to-day management of the centre is conducted by the secretariat under the supervision of the council.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iv)">
					<title>Facilities/services provided by the HKIAC</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.061</phrase> The HKIAC is located at the heart of Hong Kong&#x2019;s central business district. The existing prestigious premises provide physical facilities including 10 custom built rooms, stenographers&#x2019; room, CCTV and up-to-date telecommunications services. Besides these, the HKIAC provides a range of support services relating to arbitration proceedings. Services such as transcription, translation, video conferencing, document storage and catering are available upon arrangement. Furthermore, there is an initiative to double the size of the HKIAC&#x2019;s premises to around 13,000 square feet, with an annual investment of &#x0024;650,000 at market rates as of July 2011.<footnote num="96">
							<para>The Secretary of Justice, Wong Lan Yung announced the plans to increase investment into the HKIAC at the launch of the New Arbitration Ordinance (Cap.609). See article dated 06=09-2011, Ben Lewis: &#x201C;<content-style font-style="italic">Hong Kong Makes Play for Asia&#x2019;s Arbitration Crown&#x201D;</content-style>, <uri href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFriendly.jsp?id=1202496545910">http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFriendly.jsp?id=1202496545910</uri>
							</para>
						</footnote>
					</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.062</phrase> The HKIAC provides a free information service on dispute resolution and through its council of leading local experts and its international network of contacts it is able to provide a diversity of literature and data in connection with arbitration and other means of dispute resolution. Its growing library of books/publications is open to interested members of the public.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.063</phrase> It currently assists in the day-to-day administration of the following organisations based in Hong Kong:</para>
					<orderedlist type="manual">
						<item num="(1)">
							<para>The Hong Kong Mediation Council;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(2)">
							<para>Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators;</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(3)">
							<para>The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (East Asia Branch);</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(4)">
							<para>Society of Construction Law Hong Kong; and</para>
						</item>
						<item num="(5)">
							<para>The Academy of Experts.</para>
						</item>
					</orderedlist>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(v)">
					<title>Administered arbitration proceedings</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.064</phrase> The Hong Kong courts are supportive of arbitration and recognise the importance of non-interference in the arbitration process. Parties to arbitration in Hong Kong may be represented by anyone they choose. There is no restriction on lawyers or anyone else from other jurisdictions acting in Hong Kong as representatives or arbitrators in arbitrations.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.065</phrase> The 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards applies to Hong Kong and arrangements are now in place for reciprocal enforcement of arbitration awards between Hong Kong and mainland China. Awards made in places which have not adopted the New York Convention may be summarily enforced in Hong Kong. Since 27 June 1997, HKIAC has been empowered by the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance to appoint arbitrators under both the domestic and international regimes where the parties have not agreed on a mechanism for making appointments or the agreed mechanism has broken down.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.066</phrase> The HKIAC administers the arbitration proceedings upon request by the parties. When it administers an arbitration, the HKIAC will act as a channel of communication between the parties and the tribunal; hold security for fees and expenses of arbitrators; hold security for the amount in dispute or security for costs as directed by the arbitrators; and provide other administrative support for the proceedings as required. The HKIAC has its own Domestic Arbitration Rules and its own administered arbitration rules which are modelled on the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules and the Swiss Arbitration Rules.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.067</phrase> It is able to assist with the selection of arbitrators and mediators and to be named in contracts as appointing authority to appoint arbitrators or mediators where the parties are unable to agree. The centre maintains panels of international arbitrators of experience and distinction and, where the parties so wish, will act as arbitration administrator. The centre also makes facilities available for use in arbitrations held under the rules of the American Arbitration Association, the International Chamber of Commerce, the London Court of International Arbitration or other arbitral bodies.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(vi)">
					<title>Panels of arbitrators and mediators</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.068</phrase> The HKIAC maintains panels of distinguished and experienced arbitrators and mediators from around the world. At present there are arbitrators from 30 countries on the panels. These include arbitrators from mainland China and of course Hong Kong.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(vii)">
					<title>The HKIAC Electronic Transaction Arbitration Rules</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.069</phrase> In an effort to provide a framework for fast-track, administered arbitration of disputes arising from e-commerce transactions, the HKIAC promulgated the HKIAC Electronic Transaction Arbitration Rules (the Rules) in January 2002 as a third-party arbitration framework for the use and adoption by online merchants to handle consumer disputes online. Under these rules, a sole arbitrator shall be appointed jointly by the parties, or failing agreement, by the HKIAC. Hearings may be conducted by video link, by telephone or online as well as in person; or the matter may be dealt with on documents only.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(viii)">
					<title>Domain name dispute resolution</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.070</phrase> In June 2001, the HKIAC was appointed as the sole domain name dispute resolution provider for the .hk ccTLD (<uri href="http://www.hkiac.org">www.hkiac.org</uri>) and in December 2001 the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC) (<uri href="http://www.adndrc.org">www.adndrc.org</uri>), an undertaking between the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), Korean Internet Address Dispute Resolution Committee (KIDRC), Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (KLRCA) and the HKIAC was formed to provide dispute resolution services in regard to disputed generic top-level domain names (gTLD&#x2019;s), which are the top-level domains approved by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) (see also Chapter 20). The ADNDRC is one of only four domain name dispute providers in the world, and the first and only one in Asia.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.071</phrase> In September 2002, the HKIAC was named as the second domain name dispute resolution provider for .cn domain names, the ccTLD for mainland China.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ix)">
					<title>The Hong Kong Maritime Arbitration Group (HKMAG)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.072</phrase> The HKMAG was set up within the HKIAC to promote maritime arbitration in Hong Kong and to encourage those involved in the shipping industry to become arbitrators.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.073</phrase> Through the initiative of the HKMAG, the HKIAC has adopted documents-only procedures and small claims procedures based on similar procedures adopted by the London Maritime Arbitrators Association.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.074</phrase> Under the small claims procedures, arbitrators&#x2019; fees are limited to HK&#x0024;15,000, the HKIAC&#x2019;s fee for appointment is HK&#x0024;1,500 and recoverable costs are limited to HK&#x0024;30,000. The small claims procedures are suitable for arbitration where neither the claim nor any counterclaim exceeds US&#x0024;50,000 but may be suitable for handling larger claims when there is a simple issue at stake and it is unlikely that a long hearing is needed.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.075</phrase> The HKMAG has also produced a Hong Kong maritime arbitration clause. This clause together with the small claims and documents-only procedures can be found on the HKIAC&#x2019;s website (www.hkiac.org).</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(x)">
					<title>Vision for the future</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.076</phrase> The role of the HKIAC in Hong Kong arbitration has grown enormously over the past decade. In 1993, the HKIAC, acting either in an administrative capacity or as an appointing authority, was involved in 139 new international arbitration cases, rising to 624 in 2010, (these include 291 arbitration matters, 107 domain name disputes, and 226 mediation disputes). Of the 291 arbitration matters, 175 were international and 116 were domestic. Of the total, 16 cases were fully administered by the HKIAC in accordance with its administered arbitration rules. Of the total, 28 per cent involved construction disputes, 55 per cent involved commercial disputes and 17 per cent involved maritime disputes. The HKIAC made 158 arbitrator appointments in 2010. The HKIAC Maritime Arbitration Group reported that its members had been appointed on 131 occasions in 2010.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.077</phrase> HKIAC&#x2019;s phenomenal achievements over the past two decades are internationally recognised. Under the leadership of its Chairman and its eminent board of directors, HKIAC&#x2019;s continual success in the field of ADR is foreseeable. For further details, please refer to the HKIAC website.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xi)">
					<title>International arbitration cases received</title>
					<table frame="all" width="100%">
						<title>Table of statistics showing an international comparison of the number of international arbitration cases received</title>
						<tgroup cols="13">
							<colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" colwidth="7%"/>
							<colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" colwidth="8%"/>
							<colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" colwidth="7%"/>
							<colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" colwidth="9%"/>
							<colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" colwidth="5%"/>
							<colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" colwidth="8%"/>
							<colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" colwidth="8%"/>
							<colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" colwidth="9%"/>
							<colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" colwidth="7%"/>
							<colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" colwidth="7%"/>
							<colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" colwidth="7%"/>
							<colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" colwidth="9%"/>
							<colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" colwidth="8%"/>
							<thead>
								<row>
									<entry/>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">HKIAC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">AAA</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">CIETAC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">ICC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">JCAA</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">KCAB</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">KLRCA</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">LCIA</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">SIAC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">SCC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">BCICAC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">AFEC</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2010</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>175<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>1352</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>793<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>198<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>140<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>197</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2009</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>309<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>836<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>1482</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>817<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>78<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>232<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>114<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>215</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2008</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>602</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>703<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>1,230</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>663<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>12</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>47<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>47</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>213<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>71<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>176</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>51</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2007</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>448</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>621<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>1,118</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>599<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>15</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>59<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>40</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>137<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>70<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>84</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>82<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>40</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2006</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>394</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>586<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>981</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>593<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>11</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>47<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>37</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>133<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>65<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>141</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>76<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>N/A</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2005</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>281</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>580<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>979</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>521<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>11</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>53<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>30</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>118</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>45<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>56</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>77<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>55</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2004</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>280</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>614<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>850</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>561<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>11</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>53<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>19</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>87</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>48<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>50</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>84<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>50</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
								<row>
									<entry>
										<para>
											<content-style font-style="bold">2003</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>287<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>646<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>709</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>580<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>14</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>38<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>18</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>104</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>35<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>82</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>76<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style>
										</para>
									</entry>
									<entry>
										<para>45</para>
									</entry>
								</row>
							</tbody>
						</tgroup>
					</table>
					<para>HKIAC - Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre</para>
					<para>AAA - American Arbitration Association</para>
					<para>CIETAC - China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission</para>
					<para>ICC - International Chamber of Commerce</para>
					<para>JCAA - Japan Commercial Arbitration Association</para>
					<para>KCAB - The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board</para>
					<para>KLRCA - Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration</para>
					<para>LCIA - London Court of International Arbitration</para>
					<para>SIAC - Singapore International Arbitration Centre</para>
					<para>SCC - Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce</para>
					<para>BCICAC - British Columbia International Commercial Arbitration Centre</para>
					<para>AFEC - International Arbitral Centre of the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber</para>
					<para>
						<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;</content-style> The statistics cover international arbitration only (as known to the HKIAC)</para>
					<para>
						<content-style format="superscript">&#x2217;&#x2217;</content-style> As a result of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, the caseload for 2003 was down compared to 2002. N/A - not available</para>
					<para>-Prepared by HKIAC with the assistance of the named institutions above -</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xii)">
					<title>The Hong Kong Mediation Council (HKMC)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.078</phrase> The HKMC was set up within the HKIAC in January 1994 to promote the development and use of mediation as a method of resolving disputes. The HKMC is a division of the HKIAC and was previously known as the Mediation Group.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.079</phrase> The HKMC is run by an elected committee who is responsible for activity co-ordination and who represents mediation interest in a wide variety of areas. In addition, there are specialist sub-committees who concentrate their mediation activities in specialist areas namely commercial, community, construction and family.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.080</phrase> The HKMC aims to promote the use of mediation and other forms of ADR, encourage collaboration amongst its members and with similar professional bodies, facilitate exchange of information and provide education/training on ADR. For further details please refer to <uri href="http://www.hkiac.org">www.hkiac.org</uri>.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xiii)">
					<title>Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators (HKIArb)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.081</phrase> The HKIArb was set up in September 1996 by a group of Hong Kong professionals interested in arbitration, mediation and other kinds of dispute resolution. The institute enjoys charitable status and is non-profit making. It is funded by annual membership fees and is financially independent.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.082</phrase> The administration of the HKIArb is conducted through a council comprised of professionals of different nationalities, with a diversity of skills and experience. The council, which is elected annually, has a number of committees covering such areas as membership, finance, institutional development, education and training programmes.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.083</phrase> One of the main objectives of the institute is to promote arbitration and other methods of ADR in Hong Kong. HKIArb is involved in the training of arbitrators and mediators, the setting of appropriate standards of conduct for arbitrators and mediators in Hong Kong and law reform relevant both to arbitration and mediation. It is working to forge ties with other organisations involved in arbitration and ADR, particularly those within mainland China and in the Asia region. For further details, please refer to <uri href="http://www.hkiarb.org.hk">www.hkiarb.org.hk</uri>.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xiv)">
					<title>The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb)&#x2014;The East Asia Branch</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.084</phrase> The CIArb was founded in 1915 with the aim of promoting arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution to litigation. It was incorporated in 1925, granted a Royal Charter in 1979 and charitable status in 1990. There are branches of the institute throughout the United Kingdom and overseas. The East Asia Branch, previously known as the Hong Kong Branch, was formed in 1972 and covers the geographical area of China, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, Korea, Singapore and Indonesia. Changes to the Royal Charter in 1999 means that the institute now actively encourages the use of ADR to achieve the early and private settlement of disputes.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.085</phrase> The objective of the branch is to provide a regional organisation for members of the institute who are resident in East Asia generally. The purpose is to promote, encourage and facilitate the practice of settlement of disputes by arbitration and other means of dispute resolution, and to support and promote the status and interests of the CIArb.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.086</phrase> The East Asia Branch is committed to providing education and training in areas of law and practice relating to arbitration, holding demonstration arbitrations, disseminating useful information connected with arbitration and protecting the public interest in relation to the conduct of arbitrations as a means of resolving disputes. For further details, please refer to <uri href="http://www.ciarbasia.org">www.ciarbasia.org</uri>.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xv)">
					<title>The Academy of Experts</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.087</phrase> The Academy of Experts, founded in 1987, is a training and accrediting body with an aim for experts in litigation, dispute resolution and other advisory roles to establish and promote high objective standards. It is an international organisation with members from different disciplines and regions, namely the United Kingdom, Europe, the United States and the Far East.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.088</phrase> Since 1997, the Academy has been actively involved in the development of agreed standards for experts across the European Union. The Academy sets training requirements and examination syllabuses and has a judicial committee, comprising distinguished serving judges, to vet standards and provide guidance.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.089</phrase> The Academy is a major force in the introduction and development of ADR. It is devoted to promoting the use of independent experts in the United Kingdom and the rest of the world, achieving cost-effective resolution of disputes in traditional litigation and in ADR, maintaining codes of practice generally and in specific areas and providing information service to experts. For further details, please refer to <uri href="http://www.academy-experts.org">www.academy-experts.org</uri>.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(xvi)">
					<title>The Society of Construction Law Hong Kong (SCLHK)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.090</phrase> The SCLHK was founded in March 2000 as an association of and for all parties concerned with construction law, regulations, litigation, etc. It is a non-profit, learned society which has no affiliation with commercial organisations, other than the members themselves.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.091</phrase> The SCLHK is committed to promoting the study and understanding of construction law amongst all those involved in the construction industry and has already built up a large and energetic following. Its membership attracts professionals of all ages from various disciplines, for example, architects, engineers, surveyors, contractors, developers, solicitors, barristers, arbitrators and experts.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.092</phrase> The Society meets regularly at least six times per annum. The subject for the meetings is topical in nature and addresses the latest developments in construction law in Hong Kong/PRC and internationally. The Society of Construction Law has attracted speakers of the highest calibre from various sectors. Papers of the speeches from the meetings are circulated free of charge to members. For further details, please refer to <uri href="http://www.scl.org.uk/overseas/hongkong/hongkong.shtml">www.scl.org.uk/overseas/hongkong/hongkong.shtml</uri>.</para>
				</section>
			</section>
			<section level="sect2" number-type="manual" num="(b)">
				<title>Other arbitration institutions</title>
				<para>
					<phrase>5.093</phrase> The following arbitration institutions do have a strong presence in Hong Kong and their services are in great demand.</para>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(i)">
					<title>International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.094</phrase> The International Court of Arbitration of the ICC (ICC Court) was established in Paris in 1923. Since its inception, the ICC Court has become the leading international arbitration institution. In 2010, the ICC received 793 requests for arbitration involving 2,145 parties in 140 different countries throughout the world, In 10 per cent of the cases at least one of the parties was a State or parastatal entity, the place of arbitration was located in 53 countries throughout the world, Arbitrators of 73 nationalities were appointed or confirmed under the ICC Rules, the amount in dispute was under one million US dollars in 24.1 per cent of the new cases and 479 awards were rendered.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.095</phrase> The ICC Court is the administrative body of the ICC. It acts as the supervisory authority to oversee the ICC arbitration process and is responsible for appointing or confirming arbitrators, deciding challenges to arbitrators, scrutinising and approving arbitral awards, and in the absence of agreement between the parties, determining the place of arbitration.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.096</phrase> With regards to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, parties to an ICC administered arbitration are free to specify the number of arbitrators and the manner in which they are to be selected. Where there is no such specification, the ICC Court shall appoint a sole arbitrator, save where it appears to the ICC Court that the dispute is such as to warrant the appointment of three arbitrators. Where claims exceed US&#x0024;1.5 million, three arbitrators will be appointed. Where the tribunal is comprised of three arbitrators, each party shall have the right to select one arbitrator and the third one (the chairman of the arbitral tribunal) shall be appointed by the ICC Court, unless the parties agree otherwise.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.097</phrase> In 2007, nearly 18per cent of the parties in new ICC arbitrations were from Asia, and with the demand for arbitration services surging in countries such as China, India, Vietnam and Indonesia, the ICC decided to establish a secretariat branch in Hong Kong in November 2008. The secretariat branch is very active and with the increase in trade and the need for one to resolve one&#x2019;s disputes effectively and efficiently, the ICC services in Hong Kong and the region will undoubtedly grow accordingly.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(ii)">
					<title>London Court of International Arbitration</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.098</phrase> The London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), formerly named as the &#x201C;London Chamber of Arbitration&#x201D;, was founded in 1892. In 1985, the LCIA committed itself to a series of reforms intended to demonstrate its commitment and enhance its ability to provide comprehensive dispute resolution services to the international community. Of the 35 members of the LCIA, one quarter is from the United Kingdom and the rest are drawn from other major trading areas of the world.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.099</phrase> The LCIA&#x2019;s supervisory powers are for the most part less extensive than those of the ICC. Its main functions are to act as the final authority for the proper application of the LCIA Rules, to appoint arbitrators, to decide challenges against arbitrators and to confirm the tribunal&#x2019;s direction as to costs. The day-to-day administration of all arbitrations are dealt with by the LCIA Secretariat based in London. When hearings are outside the United Kingdom, administrative services are provided jointly by the secretariat and an appropriate local arbitration institution, such as the HKIAC.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.100</phrase> The LCIA administers dispute resolution proceedings for all parties, regardless of their membership, location and applicable law. Dispute resolution can be carried out under the LCIA&#x2019;s own arbitration rules or alternatively, under the UNCITRAL Rules. Tailor-made dispute resolution is also offered.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.101</phrase> Launched in April 2009, LCIA India is the first independent subsidiary of the London Court of International Arbitration. Drawing upon the experience and expertise of LCIA, one of the longest-established arbitral institutions in the world, it offers all the services offered by the LCIA in the United Kingdom, and with the same care to ensure the expeditious, cost effective and totally neutral administration of arbitration and other forms of ADR conducted under its auspices, whether according to LCIA India&#x2019;s own rules, or the UNCITRAL rules, or any other procedures agreed by the parties.</para>
				</section>
				<section level="sect3" number-type="manual" num="(iii)">
					<title>China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC)</title>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.102</phrase> China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) is the most important permanent arbitration institution in China. CIETAC was set up in April 1956 within the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT). Since 2000, CIETAC is also known as the Arbitration Court of China Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC). CIETAC independently and impartially resolves economic and trade disputes by means of arbitration and conciliation (mediation). CIETAC&#x2019;s headquarters are located in Beijing with two Sub-Commissions in Shenzhen and Shanghai respectively. CIETAC has also established 21 liaison offices around China to promote arbitration in their geographical area or in their special trade. At the same time, the liaison offices can provide parties with arbitration advice in time.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.103</phrase> CIETAC, sitting as one of the major permanent international institutional arbitration centres, is quite frequently selected by parties from both domestic and abroad as the institution to resolve their disputes due to its efficient and cost effective procedure administration. It enjoys friendly relations and cooperation with major arbitration institutions throughout the world and has gained good reputation at home and abroad for its independence, impartiality and efficiency. In 1999 CIETAC handled 609 disputes while in 2011, it handled 1,352 disputes.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.104</phrase> CIETAC arbitrations are generally conducted under the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission Arbitration Rules. The said Arbitration Rules have been revised six times respectively in the year 1989, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2000 and 2005 in order to meet with the requirements of the parties and comply with the international standard. The latest version of the CIETAC Arbitration Rules is effective as from 1 May 2005. The CIETAC Panel of Arbitrators has also been revised, and has come into effect since May 2011. Despite that most CIETAC cases are arbitrated in accordance with the CIETAC Arbitration Rules, in case the parties have agreed on the application of other arbitration rules, or any modification of these rules, the Parties&#x2019; agreement shall prevail except where such agreement is inoperative or in conflict with a mandatory provision of the law of the place of arbitration.</para>
					<para>
						<phrase>5.105</phrase> In 2000, CIETAC Domain Name Dispute Resolution Center was established, which devotes itself to providing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services in the areas of intellectual property and information technology. It began to use the name of CIETAC Online Dispute Resolution Center concurrently from 2005. The said Center provides dispute resolution services with regard to .CN domain names (Chinese-Character Domain Name inclusive), keywords managed by China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), as well as generic top level domain names (gTLDs) such as .com, .net and .org.</para>
				</section>
			</section>
		</section>
	</section>
</chapter>

AHK-authors.xml:

HTML Code:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<chapters>
	<chapter no="1">
		<head-4>By J. R. Weeramantry</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="2">
		<head-4>By Ernest Yang<footnote id="AHK-02.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude for the assistance provided by my colleagues, Mr. Kevin Hong and Ms. Sharon Leung, in the preparation of this Chapter. All errors and omissions are my own. </footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="3">
		<head-4>By David Bateson and Edmund Wan</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="4">
		<head-4>By Timothy Hill and Mark Lin</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="5">
		<head-4>By Christopher To<footnote id="AHK-05.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>I would like to acknowledge Alan Tang Siu Lun for his assistance in compiling parts of the Chapter.</footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="6">
		<head-4>By Chiann Bao</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="7">
		<head-4>By Justin D’Agostino and Ula Cartwright-Finch</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="8">
		<head-4>By Kim M. Rooney</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="9">
		<head-4>By Neil Kaplan QC, JP, CBE, SBS and Andrew Aglionby</head-4>
		<head-5>[Revised and Updated by William Stone QC, SBS]<footnote id="AHK-09.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>With thanks to summer students Chadwick Wong and Cheryl Leung.</footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-5>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="10">
		<head-4>By Frances van Eupen</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="11">
		<head-4>By Peter Yuen and John Choong</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="12">
		<head-4>By David Bateson and Edmund Wan</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="13">
		<head-4>By Teresa Cheng SC<footnote id="AHK-13.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>Special thanks to Andrew Aglionby, Joy Medd and Johnson Tan, co-authors to the first edition of this chapter, as portions of their work has been retained herein.</footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="14">
		<head-4>By Paul Starr<footnote id="AHK-14.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>Heartfelt thanks to Jennifer Lee-Shoy, Stefania Lucchetti, Samuel Tang and Rita Wong.</footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="15">
		<head-4>By Timothy Hill and Mark Lin</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="16">
		<head-4>By Denis Brock and Shirley Wu</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="17">
		<head-4>By Peter Chow</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="18">
		<head-4>By Paul Starr<footnote id="AHK-18.1.fn0" prefix="*">
				<footnote-para>Heartfelt thanks to Jennifer Lee-Shoy, Samuel Tang and Rita Wong for their assistance with this chapter.</footnote-para>
			</footnote>
		</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="19">
		<head-4>By Kathryn Sanger, Joseph Chu and Bing Yu</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="20">
		<head-4>By Loke-Khoon Tan</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="21">
		<head-4>By Philip Yang and Rosita Lau</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="22">
		<head-4>By Marianne Chao</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="23">
		<head-4>By Dr Nils Eliasson</head-4>
	</chapter>
	<chapter no="24">
		<head-4>Banking, International Investor-State, Insurance, Property and Employment Disputes</head-4>
		<head-5>By Frances van Eupen, Vincent Li, Gary Soo and Alexander Stock</head-5>
	</chapter>
</chapters>

and the xslt i tried is as below.

HTML Code:
<xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:ntw="Number2Word.uri" exclude-result-prefixes="ntw">

	<xsl:variable name="ThisDocument" select="document('')"/>
	<xsl:output method="html"/>
	<xsl:template match="/">

		<xsl:text disable-output-escaping="yes">&lt;!DOCTYPE&gt;</xsl:text>
		<html>
			<head>
				<xsl:text disable-output-escaping="yes"><![CDATA[</meta>]]></xsl:text>
				<title>
					<xsl:value-of select="substring-after(chapter/section/title,':')"/>
				</title>
				<link rel="stylesheet" href="er:#css" type="text/css"/><xsl:text disable-output-escaping="yes"><![CDATA[</link>]]></xsl:text>
			</head>
			<body>
				<xsl:apply-templates/>
				
				<section class="tr_footnotes">
				<hr/>
					<xsl:apply-templates select="//footnote" mode="footnote"/>
				</section>
			</body>
		</html>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template match="chapter">
		<section class="tr_chapter">
			<div class="chapter">
			<xsl:variable name="l">
			<xsl:value-of select="substring(substring-after(section/title,' '),1,1)"/>
			</xsl:variable>
				<a name="AHK_CH_0{$l}"/>
				
				<div class="chapter-title">
				<xsl:variable name="titl">
				<xsl:value-of select="substring-after(section/title,':')"/>
				</xsl:variable>
					<span class="chapter-num">
						<xsl:value-of select="concat('Chapter ',$l,' ')"/>
					</span>
					<xsl:value-of select="$titl"/>
					<!--xsl:apply-templates select="section/title"/-->
				</div>
	<div class="para align-center">
	<span class="font-style-italic">
	<xsl:value-of select="document('AHK-authors.xml')/chapters/chapter[@no=$l]/head-4"/>
	<sup>
	<a href="{current()/@id}">
	<xsl:value-of select="current()/@id">
	</xsl:value-of></a></sup>
	</span>
	</div>
	<div class="para align-right"><span class="format-smallcaps">Para</span>.</div>
				<div class="toc">
					<div class="toc-part">
						<table class="toc-div">
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td>
										<xsl:for-each select="current()/section/section|current()/section/section/section[contains(@num, '(')]|current()/section/section/section/section[contains(@num, '(')]">
											<xsl:call-template name="IndexItem">
                                            </xsl:call-template>
										</xsl:for-each>
									</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</div>
				</div>
				<xsl:apply-templates select="section/section"/>
			</div>
		</section>
	</xsl:template>
		
	<xsl:template match="chapter/para">
		<div class="para align-right">
			<span class="format-smallcaps">Para</span>.
        </div>
		<xsl:apply-templates select="section"/>
	</xsl:template>
	<!-- Index templates -->
	<!--<xsl:template name="toc" match="chapter/toc">
		<div class="toc">
			<xsl:call-template name="toc-part"/>
		</div>
	</xsl:template>-->
	<!--<xsl:template name="toc-part" match="chapter/toc/toc-part">
		<div class="toc-part">
			<xsl:call-template name="toc-div"/>
		</div>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="toc-div" match="chapter/toc/toc-part/toc-div">
		<table class="toc-div">
			<tbody>
				<xsl:for-each select="current()/toc-part/toc-div/*">
					<xsl:call-template name="toc-item"/>
				</xsl:for-each>
			</tbody>
		</table>
	</xsl:template>-->
	<!--<xsl:template name="toc-item" match="chapter/toc/toc-part/toc-div/toc-item">
		<xsl:variable name="tocpg">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('#P',current()/toc-pg/text())"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="tocpgtag" select="translate($tocpg,'.', '-')"/>
		<xsl:variable name="chapternumber">
			--><!-- Get num attribute of parent node --><!--
			<xsl:value-of select="ancestor::chapter[1]/@num"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="itemlevel">
			<xsl:value-of select="$ThisDocument//ntw:nums[@num=$chapternumber]/@word"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="tocitemlevel">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('toc-item-', $itemlevel,'-level')"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<table class="{$tocitemlevel}">
			<tbody>
				<tr>
					<td class="toc-item-num">
						<xsl:value-of select="current()/@num"/>
					</td>
					<td class="toc-title">
						<xsl:value-of select="current()/toc-title"/>
					</td>
					<td class="toc-pg">
						<a href="{$tocpgtag}">
							<xsl:value-of select="current()/toc-pg"/>
						</a>
					</td>
				</tr>
			</tbody>
		</table>
	</xsl:template>-->
	<xsl:template name="fig" match="figure">
		<div class="figure">
		<div class="figure-title">
		<xsl:value-of select="current()/title"/>
		</div>
			<xsl:variable name="numb">
			<xsl:value-of select="substring-after(graphic/@href,'_')"/>
			</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="figCon">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('er:#page-',$numb)"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		
		<img class="graphic" src="{$figCon}" alt=""/>
		</div>
		
	</xsl:template>
	
	
	<xsl:template name="IndexItem">
	<xsl:if test="not(contains(@level,'sect1'))"><!--changed fron @num to sect2-->
		<xsl:variable name="tocpg">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('#P',descendant::para/phrase[1]/text())"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="tocpgtag" select="translate($tocpg,'.', '-')"/>
		<xsl:variable name="smallcase" select="'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'"/>
		<xsl:variable name="uppercase" select="'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ'"/>
		<xsl:variable name="text" select="current()/title/text()"/>
		<xsl:variable name="Brac">
			<xsl:choose>
				<xsl:when test="contains(current()/@num,'(')">
					<xsl:value-of select="2"/>
				</xsl:when>
				<xsl:otherwise>
									<xsl:value-of select="1"/>
				</xsl:otherwise>
			</xsl:choose>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="d">
		<xsl:value-of select="concat('toc-item-',$ThisDocument//ntw:nums[@num=$Brac]/@word,'-level')"/>

<!--xsl:value-of select="$ThisDocument//ntw:nums[@num=$Brac]/@word"-->

		
		
		</xsl:variable>
		<table class="{$d}">
			<tbody>
				<tr>
					<td class="toc-item-num">
						<xsl:value-of select="@num"/>
					</td>
					<td class="toc-title">
						<xsl:value-of select="concat(substring($text,1,1), translate(substring($text,2), $uppercase, $smallcase))"/>
					</td>
					<td class="toc-pg">
						<a href="{$tocpgtag}">
							<xsl:value-of select="descendant::para/phrase[1]/text()"/>
						</a>
					</td>
				</tr>
			</tbody>
		</table>
		</xsl:if>
	</xsl:template>
	<!-- Index Templates Complete -->
	<!-- Paragraph templates -->
	<xsl:template name="section" match="section">
		<!-- Variables-->
		<xsl:variable name="classname">
			<!--Get name attribute of current node -->
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('section-',parent::section/@level)"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="chapternumber">
			<!-- Get num attribute of parent node -->
			<xsl:variable name="StrL">
			<xsl:value-of select="string-length(substring(substring-after(ancestor::chapter/section/title,'Chapter '),1,1))"/>
			</xsl:variable>
			<xsl:choose>
				<xsl:when test="$StrL>1">
				<xsl:value-of select="substring(substring-after(ancestor::chapter/section/title,'Chapter '),1,1)"/>
</xsl:when>
			<xsl:otherwise>	
<xsl:value-of select="concat('0',substring(substring-after(ancestor::chapter/section/title,'Chapter '),1,1))"/>
		
		</xsl:otherwise>	
			</xsl:choose>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="sectnum">
			<xsl:value-of select="translate(@num,'.','')"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<!--Create a string variable by concat string method  -->
		<xsl:variable name="sectionname">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('CH_',$chapternumber,'-SEC-', $sectnum)"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<!-- Template Content  --><xsl:choose>
			<xsl:when test="contains(current()/@num,'.')">
			<div class="{$classname}">
			<a name="{$sectionname}"> </a>
			<div class="section-title">
				<span class="section-num">
					<xsl:value-of select="@num"/>
					<xsl:text> </xsl:text>
				</span>
				<xsl:apply-templates select="title"/>
			</div>
			<xsl:apply-templates select="child::node()[not(self::title)]"/>
		</div></xsl:when>
		<xsl:otherwise>
		<xsl:apply-templates select="child::node()[not(self::title)]"/>
		</xsl:otherwise>
		</xsl:choose>
		
	</xsl:template>
	
	<xsl:template name="para" match="section/para">
<!--		<xsl:choose>
			<xsl:when test="contains()">-->
			
				<div class="para">
				<xsl:apply-templates select="phrase"/>
					<span class="phrase">
						<xsl:value-of select="current()/phrase"/>
					</span>
					
					<xsl:apply-templates select="child::node()[not(self::phrase)]"/>
					
				</div>
				
<!--			</xsl:when>
		</xsl:choose>-->
	</xsl:template>
	
	<xsl:template name="phrase" match="phrase">
		<xsl:variable name="phrase">
			<xsl:value-of select="concat('P',text())"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:variable name="newphrase" select="translate($phrase,'.','-')"/>
		<a>
			<xsl:attribute name="name"><xsl:value-of select="$newphrase"></xsl:value-of></xsl:attribute>
		</a>
	</xsl:template>
	
	
	
	
	<!-- Table Templates  -->
	<xsl:template name="table" match="table">
			<table style="frame-{current()/@frame} width-{translate(current()/@width,'%','')}">
	<xsl:apply-templates/>
	</table>
	</xsl:template>
	
	
<xsl:template match="tgroup">
		<colgroup>
			<xsl:apply-templates select=".//colspec"/>
</colgroup>
<xsl:apply-templates select="child::node()[not(self::colspec)]"/>
		

</xsl:template>	
	
	<xsl:template name="tbody" match="tgroup/tbody">
		<tbody>
			<xsl:for-each select="current()/row">
				<xsl:call-template name="row"/>
			</xsl:for-each>
		</tbody>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="thead" match="tgroup/thead">
		<!--<xsl:value-of select="name()"/>-->
		<xsl:for-each select="current()/row"><thead>
		
			<!--<xsl:value-of select="name()"/>-->
			<tr>
				<xsl:for-each select="current()/entry">
					<xsl:call-template name="headentry"/>
				</xsl:for-each>
</tr>
			</thead>
		</xsl:for-each>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="colspec" match="colspec">

		<col class="colnum-{current()/@colnum} colname-{current()/@colname} colwidth-{translate(current()/@colwidth,'%','')}"/><!--<xsl:text disable-output-escaping="yes"><![CDATA[</col>]]></xsl:text>-->
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="row" match="tbody/row">
		<tr>
			<xsl:for-each select="current()/entry">
				<xsl:call-template name="entry"/>
			</xsl:for-each>
		</tr>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="entry" match="entry">
		<xsl:variable name="count">
			<xsl:value-of select="count(preceding-sibling::* | following-sibling::*)"/>
		</xsl:variable>
		<xsl:choose>
			<xsl:when test="$count &lt; 2">
				<xsl:if test="position()=1">
					<td>
						<div class="para align-center">
							<xsl:value-of select="para[position()=1]"/>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td>
						<div class="para">
							<xsl:value-of select="following-sibling::node()"/>
						</div>
					</td>
				</xsl:if>
			</xsl:when>
			<xsl:when test="$count &gt; 1">
				<td>
					<div class="para">
						
						<xsl:apply-templates/>
					</div>
				</td>
			</xsl:when>
		</xsl:choose>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template name="headentry">
		<th>
			<xsl:if test="translate(current()/@namest,'col','') != translate(current()/@nameend,'col','')">
				<xsl:variable name="colspan">
					<xsl:value-of select="translate(current()/@nameend,'col','') - translate(current()/@namest,'col','') + 1"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				<xsl:attribute name="colspan"><xsl:value-of select="$colspan"></xsl:value-of></xsl:attribute>
			</xsl:if>
			<div class="para">
				<xsl:value-of select="current()/para/text()"/>
				<xsl:apply-templates/>
			</div>
		</th>
	</xsl:template>
	<!-- Table Templates complete  -->
	
	
	<!--List templates -->
	
	<xsl:template name="orderedlist" match="orderedlist">
		<ol class="eng-orderedlist orderedlist">
			<xsl:apply-templates/>
		</ol>
	</xsl:template>



	<xsl:template name="orderitem" match="item">
		<li class="item">
			<xsl:apply-templates/>
		</li>
	</xsl:template>
	
	
	<xsl:template name="orderitempara" match="item/para">
		
		
		
		<div class="para">
		
			
				<span class="item-num">
				<xsl:if test="position()=1">
					<xsl:value-of select="parent::item[1]/@num"/>
					<xsl:text> </xsl:text>
					</xsl:if>
					</span>
					<xsl:apply-templates/>
				
				
		
			</div>
		
	</xsl:template>
	<!--List templates Complete -->
	<!-- Paragraph templates Complete -->
	<!-- Footnote Templates-->
	<xsl:template match="footnote">
		<sup>
			<a>
<xsl:choose>
<!--document('AHK-authors.xml')/chapters/chapter[@no=$l]-->
<!--<xsl:if test="contains(document('AHK-authors.xml')/chapters/chapter/footnote,@id)">
	<xsl:apply-templates select="footnote"/>
</xsl:if>-->
	<xsl:when test="contains(document('AHK-authors.xml')/chapters/chapter/footnote,@id)">
	<xsl:variable name="Fn">
	<xsl:value-of select="document('AHK-authors.xml')/chapters/chapter/head-4/footnote/@id"/>
	</xsl:variable>
	<sup>
	<!--AHK-05.1.fn0-->
	<div class="a">
<a href="{substring-after(@id,'.')}">
<xsl:value-of select="substring-after(@id,'.')">
</xsl:value-of>
</a></div>
	</sup>
<xsl:attribute name="name"><xsl:text>f</xsl:text><xsl:value-of select="@num+1"/></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:attribute name="href"><xsl:text>#ftn.</xsl:text><xsl:value-of select="@num+1"/></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:attribute name="class"><xsl:text>tr_ftn</xsl:text></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:value-of select="@num+1"/>
	</xsl:when>
	<xsl:otherwise>
	<xsl:attribute name="name"><xsl:text>f</xsl:text><xsl:number level="any" count="footnote" format="1"/></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:attribute name="href"><xsl:text>#ftn.</xsl:text><xsl:value-of select="@num"/></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:attribute name="class"><xsl:text>tr_ftn</xsl:text></xsl:attribute>
				<xsl:value-of select="@num"/></xsl:otherwise>
</xsl:choose>
				
			</a>
		</sup>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template match="footnote" mode="footnote">
	<div class="tr_footnote">
		<div class="footnote">
		<sup>
			
				<a>
					<xsl:attribute name="name"><xsl:text>ftn.</xsl:text><xsl:value-of select="@num"/></xsl:attribute>
					<xsl:attribute name="href"><xsl:text>#f</xsl:text><xsl:number level="any" count="footnote" format="1"/></xsl:attribute>
					<xsl:attribute name="class"><xsl:text>tr_ftn</xsl:text></xsl:attribute>
					<xsl:number level="any" count="footnote" format="1"/>
				</a>
			</sup>
			<div class="para">
				 <xsl:variable name="new">
        			<xsl:value-of select="current()"/>
				 </xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="new1">
					<xsl:value-of select="substring(substring-after(current(),'paragraph'),2,5)"/>
				 </xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="roo">
				<xsl:value-of select="substring(//@num,2)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="befTex">
				 <xsl:value-of select="substring-before(current(),'paragraph')"/>
				 </xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="before">
				 <xsl:value-of select="substring-before($new1,'.')"/>
				 </xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="after">
				 <xsl:value-of select="substring(substring-after($new1,'.'),1,3)"/>
				 </xsl:variable>
				 <xsl:variable name="centTex">
				<xsl:value-of select="substring(substring-after(current(),$after),1)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				
				
				<xsl:variable name="pCon">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat('paragraph',' ',$before,'.',$after)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				
					<xsl:variable name="tes">
				<xsl:if test="contains($centTex,'chapter')">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat(' ',substring(substring-before($centTex,'chapter'),2))"/> 
				</xsl:if>
				</xsl:variable>
				<xsl:variable name="ChapNu">
				<xsl:value-of select="normalize-space(substring(substring-after(current(),'chapter'),1,2))"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				
				<xsl:variable name="ChapNuC">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat('er:#BVI_CH_0',$ChapNu,'/BVI_CH_0',$ChapNu)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				<xsl:variable name="curSel">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat('#P',$before,'-',$after)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				<xsl:variable name="ChapCon">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat('chapter',' ',substring(substring-after(current(),'chapter'),2,1))"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				
				<xsl:variable name="conc1">
				<xsl:value-of select="concat('er:#BVI_CH_0',$before,'/P',$before,'-',$after)"/>
				</xsl:variable>
				<xsl:value-of select="$befTex"/>
				<xsl:choose>
				<xsl:when test="contains(substring(substring-after($new,'paragraph'),1,3),'.')">
				<xsl:choose>
				
				<xsl:when test="$before = $roo">
				<a href="{$curSel}">
				<xsl:value-of select="$pCon"/>
				</a>
				</xsl:when>
				<xsl:otherwise>
				<a href="{$conc1}">
					<xsl:value-of select="$pCon"/>
				</a>
                 </xsl:otherwise>
				</xsl:choose>
				<xsl:value-of select="$tes"/>
				<xsl:if test="contains($centTex,'chapter')">
				<a href="{$ChapNuC}">
				<xsl:value-of select="$ChapCon"/>
				</a>
				</xsl:if>
				<xsl:text>.</xsl:text>
				</xsl:when>
				
				<xsl:otherwise>
				<xsl:apply-templates/>
				</xsl:otherwise>
				</xsl:choose>
		</div>
		
		</div>
		</div>
	</xsl:template>
	<xsl:template match="footnote/para/uri">
		
            <xsl:variable name="url1">
                        <xsl:value-of select="translate(@href, '&#x003C;','')" />
            </xsl:variable>
            <xsl:variable name="url2">
                        <xsl:value-of select="translate($url1, '&#x003E;','')" />
            </xsl:variable>
            <a href="{$url2}">
                        <xsl:value-of select="." />
            </a>


	</xsl:template>
	<!-- Footnote Templates Complete -->
	<xsl:template match="content-style">
		<xsl:choose>
			<xsl:when test="@format='smallcaps'">
				<xsl:value-of select="translate(normalize-space(.),'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXZ','abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz')"/>
			</xsl:when>
			<xsl:when test="@format='superscript'">
            </xsl:when>

			<xsl:otherwise>
				<xsl:variable name="fontStyle">
            <xsl:value-of select="concat('font-style-',@font-style)"/>
        </xsl:variable>
		<span class="{$fontStyle}">
             <xsl:apply-templates/>
        </span>
			</xsl:otherwise>
		</xsl:choose>
	</xsl:template>
	<!-- Namespace ntw-->
	<ntw:nums num="1" word="first"/>
	<ntw:nums num="2" word="second"/>
	<ntw:nums num="3" word="third"/>
	<ntw:nums num="4" word="forth"/>
	<ntw:nums num="5" word="fifth"/>
	<ntw:nums num="6" word="sixth"/>
	<ntw:nums num="7" word="seventh"/>
	<ntw:nums num="8" word="eighth"/>
	<ntw:nums num="9" word="nighth"/>
	<ntw:nums num="10" word="tenth"/>
	<!-- Namespace ntw ends -->
</xsl:stylesheet>

here i want my xml to compare the footnotes section with the authors chapter. if there is a footnote in authors, i want that to be 1 and the footnotes in my chapter to start from 2. i'm really confused about doing this. please let me know how do i achieve it. i've also attached the xslt that i've tried.

Thanks
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
XSLT from two XMLs sunnykeerthi XSLT 1 April 10th, 2013 02:14 PM
Change XMLs chameleon XSLT 2 November 12th, 2009 11:53 AM
Grouping xmls sac XSLT 4 July 29th, 2008 05:16 AM
Multiple xmls and xsls pasupathy.b XSLT 6 June 4th, 2007 02:07 PM
XML element referencing to other xmls alexhinz XSLT 0 February 8th, 2007 09:32 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.