Business Legal Tourism

Arbitration order to compensate Hilton cannot be executed: Sun Travels

Tourists walk up a jetty in Sun Siyam Iru Fushi resort. PHOTO/IRU FUSHI

Local firm Sun Travels and Tours declared in the High Court on Monday that Singapore International Arbitration Centre’s order for the company to pay USD 24 million to Hilton International as compensation for breaking the contract awarding operations of Sun Siyam Iru Fushi Resort to Hilton cannot be executed as it is an invalid verdict.

The management of Sun Siyam Iru Fushi Resort, which is owned by Maldives Development Alliance’s leader and Meedhoo MP Ahmed Siyam Mohamed, was awarded to the globally renowned Hilton International in 2009. The agreement was later terminated in 2013 before the end of the contract.

Hilton International had filed a lawsuit at Singapore International Arbitration Centre which had ultimately ruled that Sun Travels and Tours is to pay USD 24 million (MVR 370 million) to Hilton as damages. Hilton had then filed at the Civil Court of the Maldives to execute the Arbitration Centre’s verdict. The lower court subsequently ruled that the Arbitration Centre’s decision can only be implemented should the High Court uphold that verdict and handed over the case to the High Court.

Sun Siyam Iru Fushi Resort.

Sun Siyam Iru Fushi Resort.

Speaking at the hearing held at the High Court on Monday, Hilton International pointed out that the Maldives’ Arbitration Act states that the Civil Court holds the authority to execute the arbitration’s verdict, which Sun Travels also conceded to. However, Sun Travels and Tours’ lawyer Ahmed Muizzu stated that the Arbitration Centre’s verdict conflicts with the general policy of the Maldives and thus is invalid and cannot be executed.

Related:   Maldives takes back decision to dismiss teachers for protesting

Hilton International’s lawyer Shahdi Anwar countered that international arbitration centres’ verdicts should be appealed within three months should either party disagree with the rulings. Noting that Sun Travels had failed to appeal accordingly within the given period, he stated that Sun Travels cannot defy the verdict in court now.

In response, Sun Travel’s lawyer Muizzu stated that defendants may challenge arbitration centres’ verdicts in two ways. One way, he noted, is to file a lawsuit as a separate case in court, while the second is to challenge the verdict when the plaintiff files to execute the arbitration’s order.

Muizzu declared that Sun Travels had challenged the verdict at the Civil Court, but said he did not want to go into details right then.

Full details are available from the link below:

Source URL: Mihaaru-News

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

Notify of
avatar
wpDiscuz