MAN PING NAM v. MAN MEI KWAI

MAN PING NAM v. MAN MEI KWAI

The court varied the costs apportionment: the 2nd Defendants are entitled to one half of the costs of the trial because, although they lost on the construction of s.15, pursuing that legal issue was not improper or unreasonable; the court refused to make additional separate costs for the Notice to Admit given the timing and minimal marginal costs; the court confirmed that costs of the counterclaim relating to s.15 should be paid from Wui funds and taxed on a common fund basis. The varied order nisi was made absolute and certain costs of the hearing were allocated accordingly.

Citation
MAN PING NAM v. MAN MEI KWAI
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim) and Manager of Man Sham Chung Wui: MAN PING NAM; Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): MAN MEI KWAI; Collective Entity (wui) Subject of Dispute: MAN SHAM CHUNG WUI
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 May 2002
Case Number
HCA9852/1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Action and Counterclaim Concerning Construction of New Territories Ordinance S.15 and Management of Wui; Costs Application / Post‑judgment Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi; Judgment on Costs Application (order Made Absolute)
Outcome
Order nisi as to costs varied in part and made absolute; other parts of original costs order nisi upheld.
Legal Topics
Costs Allocation and Apportionment, Construction of New Territories Ordinance S.15, Common Fund Taxation, Notice to Admit Fact (o.62 R.3(5))
Source Language
EN

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MAN PING NAM

Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim) and Manager of Man Sham Chung Wui

MAN MEI KWAI

Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

MAN SHAM CHUNG WUI

Collective Entity (wui) Subject of Dispute

Procedural Posture

Civil Action and Counterclaim Concerning Construction of New Territories Ordinance S.15 and Management of Wui; Costs Application / Post‑judgment Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi; Judgment on Costs Application (order Made Absolute)

  1. 1 Whether 2nd Defendants are entitled to costs for legal and factual issues despite losing on construction of s.15
  2. 2 Whether a late Notice to Admit Fact entitled the 2nd Defendants to additional separate costs for proof of those facts
  3. 3 Whether costs of the counterclaim should be taxed on a common fund basis payable from Wui funds

Ratio Decidendi

The court varied the costs apportionment: the 2nd Defendants are entitled to one half of the costs of the trial because, although they lost on the construction of s.15, pursuing that legal issue was not improper or unreasonable; the court refused to make additional separate costs for the Notice to Admit given the timing and minimal marginal costs; the court confirmed that costs of the counterclaim relating to s.15 should be paid from Wui funds and taxed on a common fund basis. The varied order nisi was made absolute and certain costs of the hearing were allocated accordingly.

Court Disposition

Order nisi as to costs varied in part and made absolute; other parts of original costs order nisi upheld.

Orders

  • Sub‑paragraph (f) varied: costs of trial apportioned 1/4 to Plaintiff's original action; 1/2 to issues concerning proper construction of Section 15 of the New Territories Ordinance; 1/4 to the alleged tenancy of the 2nd Defendants; aggregate result that 2nd Defendants receive 1/2 of the costs of the trial (1/2 of...
  • Plaintiff to pay Defendant his costs of the counterclaim out of the funds and, if necessary, other properties and assets of the Wui, to be taxed on a common fund basis if not agreed.