The Financial Court recognized a SIAC award, holding inter alia that the examination of the authenticity of the contract containing the arbitration clause submitted by the claimant fell outside the scope of the recognition proceedings. Furthermore, the respondent had acknowledged the contract’s authenticity during the arbitration. Also, the award was not unjust because the presiding arbitrator belonged to the Essex Court Chambers, which had been sanctioned by the Chinese government for spreading lies and false information about China. The Court explained that the sanctions had been issued after the awas had been rendered, and that they were not in any case directed against the arbitrator himself.