Cong v Shen (No. 2) [2020] NSWSC 600

Cong v Shen (No. 2) [2020] NSWSC 600

The Court determined that costs should be apportioned according to success and conduct in the respective interlocutory motions, specifically ordering that defendants pay two-thirds of plaintiffs’ costs for the motions of 18 April 2019 and 19 June 2018, with other motions resulting in each party bearing their own costs. Amendments and appointment of estate representatives were allowed, with indemnity for the estate representative resting only on defending the family provision claim. Claims of oppression and abuse of process were not substantiated.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Edmund Bede Hao San Cong; Second Plaintiff: Teresa Mae Yin Cong; Third Plaintiff: Laurence Xavier Xiao Ming Cong; First Defendant: Yanjiao Shen; Second Defendant: Yaquin Wu
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings / Consequential Orders After Interlocutory Determinations
Outcome
Orders made amending short minutes; plaintiffs’ motion to vary orders dismissed; other motions dismissed; costs apportioned as specified.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Appointment of Estate Representatives, Costs Orders, Setting Aside Subpoenas, Indemnity for Estate Representative
Equity Practice and Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Appointment of Estate Representatives Costs Orders Setting Aside Subpoenas Indemnity for Estate Representative

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edmund Bede Hao San Cong

First Plaintiff

Teresa Mae Yin Cong

Second Plaintiff

Laurence Xavier Xiao Ming Cong

Third Plaintiff

Yanjiao Shen

First Defendant

Yaquin Wu

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings / Consequential Orders After Interlocutory Determinations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate costs orders for contested interlocutory motions
  2. 2 Entitlement and scope of amendments to pleadings
  3. 3 Appointment and indemnity obligations of estate representatives

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that costs should be apportioned according to success and conduct in the respective interlocutory motions, specifically ordering that defendants pay two-thirds of plaintiffs’ costs for the motions of 18 April 2019 and 19 June 2018, with other motions resulting in each party bearing their own costs. Amendments and appointment of estate representatives were allowed, with indemnity for the estate representative resting only on defending the family provision claim. Claims of oppression and abuse of process were not substantiated.

Court Disposition

Orders made amending short minutes; plaintiffs’ motion to vary orders dismissed; other motions dismissed; costs apportioned as specified.

Orders

  • Leave to amend subpoenas granted for various banks and Freight Solutions (Vic) Pty Ltd.
  • Defendants granted first access to documents produced by subpoenas; subsequent access for plaintiffs as per timelines.