TYM AND OTHERS v. WSP, THE INTENDED EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF LM, DECEASED AND ANOTHER

TYM AND OTHERS v. WSP, THE INTENDED EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF LM, DECEASED AND ANOTHER

The Hadkinson application was unreasonable and unnecessary given the evidence and disclosure; consequently the Applicants' summons to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed and the court exercised its discretion to order that the Applicants pay the 1st Respondent's costs forthwith to be assessed summarily because the interlocutory proceedings were severable, summary assessment was justified and immediacy was proportionate despite the Applicants' legal aid status.

Citation
TYM AND OTHERS v. WSP, THE INTENDED EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF LM, DECEASED AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Applicant: TYM; 2nd Applicant: LKY; 3rd Applicant: LKM (an infant by her mother and next friend TYM); 1st Respondent: WSP (Intended Executrix of the estate of LM, deceased); 2nd Respondent: KO Trading Limited
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 December 2016
Case Number
FCMP309/2014
Procedural Posture
Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance Miscellaneous Proceedings (hadkinson/consent Order Enforcement) / Post‑judgment Variation of Costs Applications
Outcome
Applicants' summons to vary costs dismissed; 1st Respondent's summons for costs payable forthwith granted; costs ordered nisi that Applicants pay 1st Respondent's costs of the listed summonses forthwith to be assessed summarily; directions for summary assessment given.
Legal Topics
Hadkinson Application, Enforcement of Consent Order, Variation of Costs Order, Summary Assessment of Costs, Judicial Discretion on Costs
Source Language
EN
Inheritance Law Civil Procedure Court Costs Contempt of Court Hadkinson Application Enforcement of Consent Order Variation of Costs Order Summary Assessment of Costs +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TYM

1st Applicant

LKY

2nd Applicant

LKM (an infant by her mother and next friend TYM)

3rd Applicant

WSP (Intended Executrix of the estate of LM, deceased)

1st Respondent

KO Trading Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Ordinance Miscellaneous Proceedings (hadkinson/consent Order Enforcement) / Post‑judgment Variation of Costs Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Costs Order Nisi should be varied to make no order as to costs despite dismissal of the Hadkinson application
  2. 2 Whether the costs awarded should be payable forthwith and summarily assessed against legally aided applicants
  3. 3 Whether the Applicants' conduct and the 1st Respondent's alleged non‑compliance justified depriving the 1st Respondent of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Hadkinson application was unreasonable and unnecessary given the evidence and disclosure; consequently the Applicants' summons to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed and the court exercised its discretion to order that the Applicants pay the 1st Respondent's costs forthwith to be assessed summarily because the interlocutory proceedings were severable, summary assessment was justified and immediacy was proportionate despite the Applicants' legal aid status.

Court Disposition

Applicants' summons to vary costs dismissed; 1st Respondent's summons for costs payable forthwith granted; costs ordered nisi that Applicants pay 1st Respondent's costs of the listed summonses forthwith to be assessed summarily; directions for summary assessment given.

Orders

  • Applicants' summons dated 2 November 2016 dismissed
  • Time for filing and service of the 1st Respondent's summons abridged