Glenn Haley

Glenn Haley
  1. People /

Glenn Haley

Glenn Haley

Partner


Hong Kong SAR
Glenn Haley
  1. People /

Glenn Haley

Glenn Haley

Partner


Hong Kong SAR

Glenn Haley

Partner

Hong Kong SAR

T: +852 3143 8450

VcardVcard
Download PDFDownload PDF
Print
Share
English

Biography

Glenn Haley has 35+ years’ experience in all aspects of major projects, infrastructure and the construction and engineering sectors, in both contentious and non-contentious matters.

He has also represented government and semi-government bodies in the implementation of numerous large-scale infrastructure developments, including airports, rail projects, bridges, roads, tunnels, power generation projects and commercial structures.

He is considered one of Hong Kong SAR's most pre-eminent dispute resolution practitioners as is recognised by Who’s Who of Construction Lawyers, Legal 500 Asia Pacific, Chambers & Partners Greater China Region and Asia Law. He has been listed in Legal 500's "Hall of Fame, Construction, Hong Kong" since 2021. 

As well as his considerable and varied experience in both litigation and arbitration, Glenn has been a Chairman of the Buildings Appeal Tribunal, a Hong Kong Law Society Prosecutor and has acted in various disciplinary tribunals for professional bodies and sporting bodies.

Glenn has lived and worked in Hong Kong SAR for the past 30+ years, handling matters throughout the Asia Pacific region.

Glenn regularly lectures and published articles and blogs about dispute resolution, construction law, competition law and other areas of commercial law, and has been a published author in textbooks about construction law, arbitration, procurement law. He was a contributing author to Financial Regulation: Emerging Themes in 2020 – an extensive collection of articles around the themes of supervision, governance, financial crime and investigations and digital.

Band 1: Construction: International Firms in China, Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2024

Hall of Fame: Construction in Hong Kong, Legal 500 Asia Pacific, 2024

Preeminent ranking: Hong Kong Construction & Infrastructure Litigation Lawyers, Doyle’s Guide, 2024

"A real name in the Hong Kong market as a construction lawyer."  Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2024

"He is a commercially sensitive lawyer and a go-to in Hong Kong. He is exceptionally well connected." Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2023

“Insightful and practical advice on construction-related disputes”  Legal 500 Asia Pacific, 2022

"Glenn Haley is just incredibly experienced. He is one of the most famous, 'hall of fame'-type lawyers," Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2023

Band 1: Construction: International Firms in China, Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2024

Band 1: Construction in Hong Kong, Legal 500 Asia Pacific, 2024

He is a commercially sensitive lawyer and a go-to in Hong Kong. He is exceptionally well connected.

Chambers and Partners Greater China Region, 2023

Spoken Languages

  • English

Admissions

  • ACT
  • New South Wales
  • Northern Territory
  • Queensland
  • Victoria
  • England and Wales (non-practicing)

Related Practice Areas

  • Construction Disputes

  • Infrastructure

  • Sports & Entertainment

  • Data Privacy & Security

  • Energy Transition

  • Real Estate Disputes

  • Corporate

  • Investigations

  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution

  • Regulation, Compliance & Advisory

  • International Arbitration

  • Sports & Entertainment Contract, Endorsement & Celebrity Representation Practice

  • Anti-Doping Practice

  • Sports & Event Venue Real Estate Infrastructure and Operation

  • Naming Rights & Sponsorship Practice

  • Sports & Entertainment M&A Practice

  • Sports & Entertainment Litigation Practice

  • Sports & Entertainment Specialty Counseling Practice

  • Entertainment Industry Practice

  • Sports & Event Financing

  • Collegiate Sports Practice

  • Olympic & National Governing Body Practice

  • Professional Sports Team Practice

  • Data Center & Digital Infrastructure Team

  • Business & Commercial Disputes

  • Real Estate

  • Securities Litigation and Enforcement

Related Insights

Insights
Dec 20, 2024

Hong Kong Security of Payment Ordinance passed; goes into operation on 28 August 2025

The second and third reading of the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill concluded at the Legislative Council on 18 December 2024. As an important milestone of the security of payment regime in Hong Kong, the Construction Industry Security of Payment Ordinance (“Ordinance”) will be published in the Government Gazette on 27 December 2024. According to section 1(3), the provisions on power of Secretary for Development for registration and administration of Adjudicator Nominating Bodies (“ANBs”) will take effect on the gazettal date, i.e. 27 December 2024. The remaining provisions of the Ordinance will come into operation on 28 August 2025. Construction contracts entered into on or after this date will be governed by the Ordinance.
Insights
Oct 07, 2024

HK Security of Payment Bill: Government responds to submissions from the public

The Hong Kong Government received 37 submissions from the public in July 2024 regarding the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”) and held discussions with deputations from different stakeholders at a LegCo meeting on 16 July 2024. On 2 October 2024, in a letter to the LegCo, the Government summarised some of the key points that had been made in the submissions from the public and gave its response to the submissions. While there is no indication from this letter that the Government would make any amendments to the wording of the Bill in relation to the submissions from the public, the letter raises some important points regarding the Bill and some follow-up actions that the Government said that it will undertake to deal with concerns raised by various stakeholders.
Insights
Sep 27, 2024

Smart contracts and the use of arbitration to resolve related disputes

In recent years, technology advancement has introduced new methods for contract formation. In particular, the rise of blockchain technology has led to the emergence of “smart contracts”, which are digital contracts which automatically execute transactions when pre-determined conditions are met. This article provides a brief explanation as to what smart contracts are, and examines some of the potential issues that could arise under Hong Kong law when arbitration is used to resolve smart contract disputes.
Insights
Sep 25, 2024

HK Security of Payment Bill: an insolvency exception to ban against “pay when paid” clauses?

On 16 July 2024, the Hong Kong LegCo Bills Committee which is considering the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”) held a meeting to receive representations and submissions on the Bill from deputations sent by stakeholders in the construction industry. Some deputations suggested that the Government should consider specifying cases of non-payment caused by bankruptcy of contractual parties at upper tiers in the supply chain as an exception to the ban against “pay when paid” clauses. The deputations argued that this exception would “prevent series of bankruptcy of various contractual parties at lower tiers”.[1]  (Of course, there always will be one or more parties at the lowest levels that will bear the brunt of the bankruptcy further up the contractual chain.)
Insights
Sep 24, 2024

HK Court rejects “Arbitral Confidentiality” Argument in Parallel Court and Arbitration Proceedings

In Beijing Songxianghu Architectural Decoration Engineering Co., Ltd v Kitty Kam [2024] HKCFI 1657 (date of reasons for decision: 19 June 2024), the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“the Court”) dismissed an application for a confidentiality order – made on the basis of confidentiality protected in the arbitration under the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) – to effectively render the Court proceedings and all information relating to a set of related arbitration proceedings confidential (“Confidentiality Application”). The Court rejected the Defendant’s argument that arbitral confidentiality was being undermined by the Plaintiff’s decision to commence both an arbitration and allegedly “parallel proceedings” in Court, which “effectively left open a loophole that allow the Plaintiff to breach its confidentiality obligations … through the backdoor at its wishes”. This case highlights that arbitral confidentiality is not absolute, and must be balanced with the fundamental principle of open administration of justice when a party discloses information in protecting or pursuing a legal right or interest in legal proceedings.
Insights
Sep 02, 2024

HK Court Overrules Arbitrator’s Decision regarding Compatibility of Arbitration Agreements

In SYL v GIF [2024] HKCFI 1324 (date of judgment: 20 May 2024), the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“the Court”) set aside an Interim Award made by the arbitral tribunal (“Tribunal”) in an HKIAC-administered arbitration. The award related to an unsuccessful jurisdictional challenge made before the Tribunal. A single arbitration was commenced in relation to three separate but related contracts. The Court was required to analyse the meaning and effect of “mutatis mutandis” in a Loan Agreement context / relationship, where two related Security Deeds provided that the dispute resolution provision in the Loan Agreement applied “mutatis mutandis”. The Court agreed with the plaintiff on both of what had been labelled by the parties as (i) the “Compatibility Ground” (that the arbitration agreements in the three contracts are incompatible with one another), and (ii) the “Agreement Ground” (that the composition of the Tribunal was defective because the appointment had not been done in accordance with the parties’ agreement under the three contracts). The Court therefore set aside the Interim Award made by the Tribunal. Following on from our earlier article on AAA, BBB, CCC v DDD [2024] HKCFI 513 (which covered the situation where there is a group of related contracts and two or more of those contracts have different dispute resolution clauses), this case of SYL v GIF addresses the opposite situation where the same dispute resolution provision applies “mutatis mutandis” to separate but related contracts (i.e. purports to have the same dispute resolution clauses but “with all necessary changes having been made”). The case of SYL v GIF demonstrates neatly that the “mutatis mutandis” drafting “shortcut” might not result in disputes in all related contracts being able to be brought in a single arbitration.
Insights
Aug 22, 2024

HK Court of Appeal set aside arbitral award for the absence of underlying disputes

In CMBICDHAW Investments Limited v CDH Fund V Limited Partnership & others [2024] HKCA 516 (judgment date: 10 July 2024), the Hong Kong Court of Appeal (CA) addressed an appeal regarding the Court of First Instance’s (CFI) decision to set aside parts of an arbitral award due to the absence of a relevant dispute. The disputed portions included a declaration of non-liability and additional comments made by the arbitrator. The CA determined that no relevant dispute existed to establish the arbitrator’s jurisdiction and that there was an abuse of process.
Insights
Aug 05, 2024

HK Government responds to 19 June letter from LegCo in-house lawyer regarding the Security of Payment Bill

Our earlier Insight “LegCo in-house lawyers request clarifications regarding the Security of Payment Bill” reported that the Legal Service Division of the LegCo wrote a letter on 19 June 2024 to the HK Government seeking to clarify certain matters in the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”). On 18 July 2024, the HK Government responded by a letter.

Related Insights

Insights
Dec 20, 2024
Hong Kong Security of Payment Ordinance passed; goes into operation on 28 August 2025
The second and third reading of the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill concluded at the Legislative Council on 18 December 2024. As an important milestone of the security of payment regime in Hong Kong, the Construction Industry Security of Payment Ordinance (“Ordinance”) will be published in the Government Gazette on 27 December 2024. According to section 1(3), the provisions on power of Secretary for Development for registration and administration of Adjudicator Nominating Bodies (“ANBs”) will take effect on the gazettal date, i.e. 27 December 2024. The remaining provisions of the Ordinance will come into operation on 28 August 2025. Construction contracts entered into on or after this date will be governed by the Ordinance.
Awards
Nov 20, 2024
BCLP Recognised in Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Greater China 2025 for a second time
Insights
Oct 07, 2024
HK Security of Payment Bill: Government responds to submissions from the public
The Hong Kong Government received 37 submissions from the public in July 2024 regarding the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”) and held discussions with deputations from different stakeholders at a LegCo meeting on 16 July 2024. On 2 October 2024, in a letter to the LegCo, the Government summarised some of the key points that had been made in the submissions from the public and gave its response to the submissions. While there is no indication from this letter that the Government would make any amendments to the wording of the Bill in relation to the submissions from the public, the letter raises some important points regarding the Bill and some follow-up actions that the Government said that it will undertake to deal with concerns raised by various stakeholders.
Insights
Sep 27, 2024
Smart contracts and the use of arbitration to resolve related disputes
In recent years, technology advancement has introduced new methods for contract formation. In particular, the rise of blockchain technology has led to the emergence of “smart contracts”, which are digital contracts which automatically execute transactions when pre-determined conditions are met. This article provides a brief explanation as to what smart contracts are, and examines some of the potential issues that could arise under Hong Kong law when arbitration is used to resolve smart contract disputes.
Insights
Sep 25, 2024
HK Security of Payment Bill: an insolvency exception to ban against “pay when paid” clauses?
On 16 July 2024, the Hong Kong LegCo Bills Committee which is considering the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”) held a meeting to receive representations and submissions on the Bill from deputations sent by stakeholders in the construction industry. Some deputations suggested that the Government should consider specifying cases of non-payment caused by bankruptcy of contractual parties at upper tiers in the supply chain as an exception to the ban against “pay when paid” clauses. The deputations argued that this exception would “prevent series of bankruptcy of various contractual parties at lower tiers”.[1]  (Of course, there always will be one or more parties at the lowest levels that will bear the brunt of the bankruptcy further up the contractual chain.)
Insights
Sep 24, 2024
HK Court rejects “Arbitral Confidentiality” Argument in Parallel Court and Arbitration Proceedings
In Beijing Songxianghu Architectural Decoration Engineering Co., Ltd v Kitty Kam [2024] HKCFI 1657 (date of reasons for decision: 19 June 2024), the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“the Court”) dismissed an application for a confidentiality order – made on the basis of confidentiality protected in the arbitration under the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 609) – to effectively render the Court proceedings and all information relating to a set of related arbitration proceedings confidential (“Confidentiality Application”). The Court rejected the Defendant’s argument that arbitral confidentiality was being undermined by the Plaintiff’s decision to commence both an arbitration and allegedly “parallel proceedings” in Court, which “effectively left open a loophole that allow the Plaintiff to breach its confidentiality obligations … through the backdoor at its wishes”. This case highlights that arbitral confidentiality is not absolute, and must be balanced with the fundamental principle of open administration of justice when a party discloses information in protecting or pursuing a legal right or interest in legal proceedings.
Insights
Sep 02, 2024
HK Court Overrules Arbitrator’s Decision regarding Compatibility of Arbitration Agreements
In SYL v GIF [2024] HKCFI 1324 (date of judgment: 20 May 2024), the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“the Court”) set aside an Interim Award made by the arbitral tribunal (“Tribunal”) in an HKIAC-administered arbitration. The award related to an unsuccessful jurisdictional challenge made before the Tribunal. A single arbitration was commenced in relation to three separate but related contracts. The Court was required to analyse the meaning and effect of “mutatis mutandis” in a Loan Agreement context / relationship, where two related Security Deeds provided that the dispute resolution provision in the Loan Agreement applied “mutatis mutandis”. The Court agreed with the plaintiff on both of what had been labelled by the parties as (i) the “Compatibility Ground” (that the arbitration agreements in the three contracts are incompatible with one another), and (ii) the “Agreement Ground” (that the composition of the Tribunal was defective because the appointment had not been done in accordance with the parties’ agreement under the three contracts). The Court therefore set aside the Interim Award made by the Tribunal. Following on from our earlier article on AAA, BBB, CCC v DDD [2024] HKCFI 513 (which covered the situation where there is a group of related contracts and two or more of those contracts have different dispute resolution clauses), this case of SYL v GIF addresses the opposite situation where the same dispute resolution provision applies “mutatis mutandis” to separate but related contracts (i.e. purports to have the same dispute resolution clauses but “with all necessary changes having been made”). The case of SYL v GIF demonstrates neatly that the “mutatis mutandis” drafting “shortcut” might not result in disputes in all related contracts being able to be brought in a single arbitration.
Insights
Aug 22, 2024
HK Court of Appeal set aside arbitral award for the absence of underlying disputes
In CMBICDHAW Investments Limited v CDH Fund V Limited Partnership & others [2024] HKCA 516 (judgment date: 10 July 2024), the Hong Kong Court of Appeal (CA) addressed an appeal regarding the Court of First Instance’s (CFI) decision to set aside parts of an arbitral award due to the absence of a relevant dispute. The disputed portions included a declaration of non-liability and additional comments made by the arbitrator. The CA determined that no relevant dispute existed to establish the arbitrator’s jurisdiction and that there was an abuse of process.
Insights
Aug 05, 2024
HK Government responds to 19 June letter from LegCo in-house lawyer regarding the Security of Payment Bill
Our earlier Insight “LegCo in-house lawyers request clarifications regarding the Security of Payment Bill” reported that the Legal Service Division of the LegCo wrote a letter on 19 June 2024 to the HK Government seeking to clarify certain matters in the Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill (“Bill”). On 18 July 2024, the HK Government responded by a letter.