TUNG KIN LEI v. NG TING LAM AND OTHERS

TUNG KIN LEI v. NG TING LAM AND OTHERS

The court refused to vary the costs order nisi and upheld the grant of a certificate for two counsel because the legal issue was novel in Hong Kong, of significant public importance affecting future petitions, and required detailed research; consequently the application to vary was dismissed and costs of the application were ordered against the Petitioner to be paid to the 2nd Respondent with specified filing timetables for costs assessment.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1329
Parties
Petitioner: TUNG KIN LEI; 1st Respondent: NG TING LAM; 2nd Respondent: TANG YIU WING; 3rd Respondent (returning Officer): CHAN YUEN MAN, AMY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 May 2021
Case Number
HCAL245/2020
Procedural Posture
District Council Election Petition Under District Councils Ordinance and Elections (corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Application to vary the costs order nisi was refused; certificate for two counsel upheld; costs of the application awarded to the 2nd Respondent; procedural timetable for filing and assessment of costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Costs, Certificate for Two Counsel, District Council Election, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language
EN
Election Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Costs Certificate for Two Counsel District Council Election Statutory Interpretation

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TUNG KIN LEI

Petitioner

NG TING LAM

1st Respondent

TANG YIU WING

2nd Respondent

CHAN YUEN MAN, AMY

3rd Respondent (returning Officer)

Procedural Posture

District Council Election Petition Under District Councils Ordinance and Elections (corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied to grant certificate for only one counsel
  2. 2 Whether it was appropriate to grant a certificate for two counsel in this matter
  3. 3 Allocation and timetable for payment and assessment of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to vary the costs order nisi and upheld the grant of a certificate for two counsel because the legal issue was novel in Hong Kong, of significant public importance affecting future petitions, and required detailed research; consequently the application to vary was dismissed and costs of the application were ordered against the Petitioner to be paid to the 2nd Respondent with specified filing timetables for costs assessment.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the costs order nisi was refused; certificate for two counsel upheld; costs of the application awarded to the 2nd Respondent; procedural timetable for filing and assessment of costs ordered.

Orders

  • Application to vary refused
  • Costs of the application to be paid to the 2nd Respondent