LAM YIU PANG v. LAM YIU HOI

LAM YIU PANG v. LAM YIU HOI

The court held that a certificate for leading counsel was not warranted and only one junior counsel should be certified because the case raised no difficult, novel or complex legal issues, was essentially a factual dispute requiring no specialised skill, the matter lacked particular importance to the applicants given the long delay since death, the respondent did not instruct a leader and the instructed junior was competent to conduct the trial alone.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2884
Parties
Plaintiff (main Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Lam Yiu Pang; Defendant (main Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Lam Yiu Hoi; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Lam Yiu Cho; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Lam Yiu Kwan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 November 2023
Case Number
HCAP31/2020
Procedural Posture
Probate Action / Interlocutory Application for Certificate for Two Counsel (pre Trial)
Outcome
Certificate for one junior counsel only granted; certificate for leading counsel and for two counsel denied
Legal Topics
Grant of Letters of Administration, Propounding a Lost Will, Certificate for Two Counsel, Allocation of Costs
Source Language
EN
Probate Civil Procedure Costs and Fees Grant of Letters of Administration Propounding a Lost Will Certificate for Two Counsel Allocation of Costs

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

Parties

Lam Yiu Pang

Plaintiff (main Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Lam Yiu Hoi

Defendant (main Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Lam Yiu Cho

2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Lam Yiu Kwan

3rd Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Probate Action / Interlocutory Application for Certificate for Two Counsel (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a certificate for two counsel (leading and junior) should be granted to the applicants for the trial
  2. 2 Whether the instruction of leading counsel was necessary or proper in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether a junior counsel in addition to a leader was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a certificate for leading counsel was not warranted and only one junior counsel should be certified because the case raised no difficult, novel or complex legal issues, was essentially a factual dispute requiring no specialised skill, the matter lacked particular importance to the applicants given the long delay since death, the respondent did not instruct a leader and the instructed junior was competent to conduct the trial alone.

Court Disposition

Certificate for one junior counsel only granted; certificate for leading counsel and for two counsel denied

Orders

  • Certificate issued for one junior counsel for the trial of these proceedings
  • Costs to be paid by Lam Yiu Hoi to Lam Yiu Pang and to the Other Brothers as per the Consent Order, including counsel's trial brief