NEW CENTURY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. v. CHINA VENTURETECHNO INTERNATIONAL CO. LTD.

NEW CENTURY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. v. CHINA VENTURETECHNO INTERNATIONAL CO. LTD.

The appeal is allowed to the extent that the master's Order 26 costs direction is varied to 'costs to the defendant in any event' because the master's differentiation between the two contemporaneous summonses was unjustified and likely arose from inattention to the summons wording; the appellate court applied the Hoddle standard (limited review of master's discretion) and upheld the master's certificate for counsel; costs of the appeal ordered three-quarters to the plaintiff in any event.

Citation
NEW CENTURY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. v. CHINA VENTURETECHNO INTERNATIONAL CO. LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff (action No. A1868); Defendant (action No. A1921): CHINA VENTURETECHNO INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED; Defendant (action No. A1868); Plaintiff (action No. A1921): NEW CENTURY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED trading as CENTURY CHAIN PROPERTY AGENCY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 January 1996
Case Number
HCA1921/1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Master's Costs Order (interlocutory) / Oral Judgment in Chambers (appeal Heard 11 January 1996)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; master's costs order varied
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Order 26 RSC (interrogatories), Order 24 RSC (discovery), Standard of Appellate Review of Master's Costs Orders, Certificate for Counsel
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Discovery and Interrogatories Appeals Costs Orders Order 26 RSC (interrogatories) Order 24 RSC (discovery) Standard of Appellate Review of Master's Costs Orders +1 more

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHINA VENTURETECHNO INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED

Plaintiff (action No. A1868); Defendant (action No. A1921)

NEW CENTURY CHAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED trading as CENTURY CHAIN PROPERTY AGENCY

Defendant (action No. A1868); Plaintiff (action No. A1921)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Master's Costs Order (interlocutory) / Oral Judgment in Chambers (appeal Heard 11 January 1996)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellate court should rehear the merits of a master's costs decision or apply the restrictive test from Hoddle
  2. 2 Whether differentiation in costs orders between two contemporaneous interlocutory applications was justified
  3. 3 Whether the master's grant of a certificate for counsel was an improper exercise of discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed to the extent that the master's Order 26 costs direction is varied to 'costs to the defendant in any event' because the master's differentiation between the two contemporaneous summonses was unjustified and likely arose from inattention to the summons wording; the appellate court applied the Hoddle standard (limited review of master's discretion) and upheld the master's certificate for counsel; costs of the appeal ordered three-quarters to the plaintiff in any event.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; master's costs order varied

Orders

  • Master Betts' order as to costs under the Order 26 summons varied to read: costs to the Defendant in any event
  • Certificate for counsel granted by the master upheld