莊裕安 對 終審法院及另一人

莊裕安 對 終審法院及另一人

The appeal was dismissed and, on costs, the Court applied the 'rates between parties' assessment principle because the documents and arguments in the appeal closely matched those at trial; accordingly the Court reduced the hours claimed for items C1, D2 and D3 and assessed the second suggested respondent's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCA 882
Parties
Applicant: 莊裕安; First Suggested Respondent: 終審法院; Second Suggested Respondent: 律政司
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 June 2022
Case Number
CACV184/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (judicial Review Origin) / Costs Assessment Following Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay costs to the second suggested respondent assessed at HKD55,000.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Appeal, Costs Assessment, Party and Party Costs
Source Language
ch
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Judicial Review Appeal Costs Assessment Party and Party Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

莊裕安

Applicant

終審法院

First Suggested Respondent

律政司

Second Suggested Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (judicial Review Origin) / Costs Assessment Following Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether the appellant is liable for the respondent's costs after dismissal of the appeal
  2. 2 how to assess appropriate hours and items in the bill of costs where appeal materials and arguments mirror those at first instance
  3. 3 application of the 'rates between parties' (訴訟各方對評) assessment principle to particular bill items (C1, D2, D3)

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed and, on costs, the Court applied the 'rates between parties' assessment principle because the documents and arguments in the appeal closely matched those at trial; accordingly the Court reduced the hours claimed for items C1, D2 and D3 and assessed the second suggested respondent's recoverable costs at HKD55,000, noting the appellant filed no opposition to the costs bill.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay costs to the second suggested respondent assessed at HKD55,000.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Appellant ordered to pay the second suggested respondent's costs assessed at HKD55,000.