LI MAN TAK AND ANOTHER v. LAM YAT PING AND ANOTHER

LI MAN TAK AND ANOTHER v. LAM YAT PING AND ANOTHER

The judge held that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover costs "of and occasioned by the amendment and thrown away"; allowed half of the first day's wasted costs ($22,000), allowed the uncontested second item in full ($64,000), allowed the third item in full ($48,000), producing an assessed total of $134,000, and awarded 90% of that assessed sum, resulting in a gross sum assessment of $120,600 to be paid forthwith by the defendants to the plaintiffs.

Citation
LI MAN TAK AND ANOTHER v. LAM YAT PING AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: LI MAN TAK also known as MICHAEL LI; 2nd Plaintiff: LOW CHI HANG; 1st Defendant: LAM YAT PING also known as HENRY LAM; 2nd Defendant (operated by GOLDEN NETWORK INVESTMENT Co. Ltd): REALTEC TECHNOLOGIES COMPANY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 October 2000
Case Number
HCA4497/2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Application Following Amendment of Pleadings / Costs Assessment at Trial After Amendment Application (adjournment to Resume Trial)
Outcome
Costs awarded to the plaintiffs for and occasioned by the amendment and thrown away; gross sum assessment of $120,600 ordered to be paid forthwith by the defendants.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Wasted Costs, Costs Assessment, Adjournment
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Pleadings Civil Litigation Amendment of Pleadings Wasted Costs Costs Assessment Adjournment

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LI MAN TAK also known as MICHAEL LI

1st Plaintiff

LOW CHI HANG

2nd Plaintiff

LAM YAT PING also known as HENRY LAM

1st Defendant

REALTEC TECHNOLOGIES COMPANY

2nd Defendant (operated by GOLDEN NETWORK INVESTMENT Co. Ltd)

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs Application Following Amendment of Pleadings / Costs Assessment at Trial After Amendment Application (adjournment to Resume Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs thrown away by reason of defendants' amendment of pleadings are recoverable by the plaintiffs
  2. 2 How to quantify and apportion the recoverable costs
  3. 3 Whether a percentage reduction of assessed costs is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The judge held that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover costs "of and occasioned by the amendment and thrown away"; allowed half of the first day's wasted costs ($22,000), allowed the uncontested second item in full ($64,000), allowed the third item in full ($48,000), producing an assessed total of $134,000, and awarded 90% of that assessed sum, resulting in a gross sum assessment of $120,600 to be paid forthwith by the defendants to the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the plaintiffs for and occasioned by the amendment and thrown away; gross sum assessment of $120,600 ordered to be paid forthwith by the defendants.

Orders

  • Costs of and occasioned by the amendment and thrown away to be given to the plaintiffs
  • Gross sum assessment of HKD 120600 to be paid forthwith by the defendants