Mi v Li

The appeal concerned an application to enforce an interim arbitral award. The primary judge had dismissed the appellant's application to set aside the enforcement order. The appellant sought to appeal this decision.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in her characterisation of the appellant's case, whether the primary judge had erred in finding that *Anshun* estoppel applied, and whether the primary judge had erred in her application of rule 3254 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT).

The Court of Appeal found no error in the primary judge's decision. It held that the primary judge had correctly identified the appellant's arguments and that the doctrine of *Anshun* estoppel was appropriately applied, preventing the appellant from raising arguments that could and should have been raised in earlier proceedings. Furthermore, the Court found no misapplication of the relevant Court Procedures Rules.

Consequently, the appeal against the orders of McWilliam AsJ was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.