Hua She Asset Management (Shanghai) Co Ltd v Kei Kin Hung & Ors

Hua She Asset Management (Shanghai) Co Ltd v Kei Kin Hung & Ors

The claimant's procedural failures, including late service of notices and late application for relief from sanctions, were the primary cause of the adjournment; therefore, the claimant must bear the majority of the costs of and occasioned by the adjournment, with reductions for respondents who share responsibility for inadequate time estimates.

Parties
Claimant: Hua She Asset Management (Shanghai) Co Ltd.; First Respondent: Kei Kin Hung; Second Respondent: Sparkle Roll Capital Ltd; Third Respondent: Ms Meihe Qi; Fourth Respondent: Fourth Respondent; Fifth Respondent: Fifth Respondent; Sixth Respondent: Sixth Respondent; Seventh Respondent: Seventh Respondent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Costs Following Adjournment
Outcome
Costs awarded against claimant, apportioned among respondents according to responsibility.
Legal Topics
Costs, Adjournment, Relief From Sanctions, Charging Order
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Costs Adjournment Relief From Sanctions Charging Order

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hua She Asset Management (Shanghai) Co Ltd.

Claimant

Kei Kin Hung

First Respondent

Sparkle Roll Capital Ltd

Second Respondent

Ms Meihe Qi

Third Respondent

Fourth Respondent

Fourth Respondent

Fifth Respondent

Fifth Respondent

Sixth Respondent

Sixth Respondent

Seventh Respondent

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Costs Following Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who should bear the costs of and occasioned by the adjournment
  2. 2 Responsibility for inadequate time estimate
  3. 3 Relief from sanctions for late service of notice challenging authenticity

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's procedural failures, including late service of notices and late application for relief from sanctions, were the primary cause of the adjournment; therefore, the claimant must bear the majority of the costs of and occasioned by the adjournment, with reductions for respondents who share responsibility for inadequate time estimates.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded against claimant, apportioned among respondents according to responsibility.

Orders

  • Second and third respondents recover 75% of their costs of and occasioned by the adjournment from the claimant, assessed on the standard basis.
  • Fourth respondent recovers 50% of her costs of the adjournment from the claimant, assessed on the standard basis.