{"id":5025,"date":"2017-06-21T14:17:36","date_gmt":"2017-06-21T04:17:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/?p=5025"},"modified":"2019-09-21T11:34:05","modified_gmt":"2019-09-21T01:34:05","slug":"case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/","title":{"rendered":"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 1\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\n<p>In a recent decision,1 the Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered that court proceedings between shareholders in a Taiwanese bubble tea company be stayed in favour of UNCITRAL Rules arbitration at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre.<\/p>\n<p>The dispute arose between two shareholders of Infinite Plus, an Australian company that acts as franchisor for the publicly-listed Taiwanese bubble tea company, La Kaffa International Co Ltd (La Kaffa Taiwan), operating under the brand &#8220;ChaTime&#8221;. One of the shareholders, Yang Yang Qian, issued the other, Chen Zhao, with an Expulsion Notice under a shareholders agreement. The Expulsion Notice set out alleged breaches by Mr Zhao of the shareholders agreement between him, Ms Qian, Infinite Plus Pty Ltd and La Kaffa International Co Ltd, a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands (La Kaffa Cayman) and triggered a buy-out procedure, estimating the value of Mr Zhao\u2019s interest in Infinite Plus at $1,500,000.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>Read full article <a href=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/Case-note-Infinite-Plus.pdf\"><strong>HERE <\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-5026\" src=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-66x66.jpg 66w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-100x100.jpg 100w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-150x150.jpg 150w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg 300w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait.jpg 414w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 200px) 100vw, 200px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>Dr Sam Luttrell<\/strong>, Partner, Clifford Chance, Perth<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-5027\" src=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait-300x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait-66x66.jpg 66w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait-100x100.jpg 100w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait-150x150.jpg 150w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait-300x300.jpg 300w, https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/McLACHLAN-Lishbel-01-short-portrait.jpg 414w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 200px) 100vw, 200px\" \/><\/p>\n<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 1\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\n<p><strong>Ishbel McLachlan<\/strong>, Law Graduate, Clifford Chance, Perth<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a recent decision,1 the Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered that court proceedings between shareholders in a Taiwanese bubble tea company be stayed in favour of UNCITRAL Rules arbitration at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre. The dispute arose between two shareholders of Infinite Plus, an Australian company that acts as franchisor for the publicly-listed Taiwanese bubble tea company, La Kaffa International Co Ltd (La Kaffa Taiwan), operating under the brand &#8220;ChaTime&#8221;. One of the shareholders, Yang Yang [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v22.5 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In a recent decision,1 the Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered that court proceedings between shareholders in a Taiwanese bubble tea company be stayed in favour of UNCITRAL Rules arbitration at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre. The dispute arose between two shareholders of Infinite Plus, an Australian company that acts as franchisor for the publicly-listed Taiwanese bubble tea company, La Kaffa International Co Ltd (La Kaffa Taiwan), operating under the brand &#8220;ChaTime&#8221;. One of the shareholders, Yang Yang [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Australian Disputes Centre\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-06-21T04:17:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-21T01:34:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Michael Lockhart\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Michael Lockhart\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/\",\"name\":\"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-06-21T04:17:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-21T01:34:05+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/ef530f6173822012743840c68ff401e4\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait.jpg\",\"width\":414,\"height\":414},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/\",\"name\":\"Australian Disputes Centre\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/ef530f6173822012743840c68ff401e4\",\"name\":\"Michael Lockhart\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/813c3fe31221e4be8eedf9d671a594d5?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/813c3fe31221e4be8eedf9d671a594d5?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Michael Lockhart\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/author\/michael\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre","og_description":"In a recent decision,1 the Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered that court proceedings between shareholders in a Taiwanese bubble tea company be stayed in favour of UNCITRAL Rules arbitration at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre. The dispute arose between two shareholders of Infinite Plus, an Australian company that acts as franchisor for the publicly-listed Taiwanese bubble tea company, La Kaffa International Co Ltd (La Kaffa Taiwan), operating under the brand &#8220;ChaTime&#8221;. One of the shareholders, Yang Yang [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/","og_site_name":"Australian Disputes Centre","article_published_time":"2017-06-21T04:17:36+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-21T01:34:05+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg"}],"author":"Michael Lockhart","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Michael Lockhart","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/","url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/","name":"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470 | Australian Disputes Centre","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait-300x300.jpg","datePublished":"2017-06-21T04:17:36+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-21T01:34:05+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/ef530f6173822012743840c68ff401e4"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/LUTTRELL-Sam-02-short-portrait.jpg","width":414,"height":414},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/case-note-matter-infinite-plus-pty-ltd-2017-nswsc-470\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Case note: In the matter of Infinite Plus Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 470"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#website","url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/","name":"Australian Disputes Centre","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/ef530f6173822012743840c68ff401e4","name":"Michael Lockhart","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/813c3fe31221e4be8eedf9d671a594d5?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/813c3fe31221e4be8eedf9d671a594d5?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Michael Lockhart"},"url":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/author\/michael\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5025"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5025"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5025\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5025"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5025"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/disputescentre.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5025"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}