RE OCEAN TIME DEVELOPMENT LTD

RE OCEAN TIME DEVELOPMENT LTD

The costs orders nisi were varied: the appeals against rejection of proofs of debt were certified as fit for two counsel; the liquidators must pay Grand Gain 90% of its costs of the appeals (taxed on a party and party basis) and may meet that liability from the assets of the companies insofar as assets suffice; each party bears its own costs of the unopposed applications to vary that order; Grand Gain must pay the liquidators' costs of the striking out application and of the action on an indemnity basis (taxable on indemnity if not agreed), and the costs of the application to vary that costs order are to be treated as part of the costs of the action and recoverable by the liquidators on...

Citation
RE OCEAN TIME DEVELOPMENT LTD
Parties
Plaintiff / Creditor: Grand Gain Investment Limited; 1st Defendant / Liquidator: Cosimo Borrelli; 2nd Defendant / Liquidator: Kelvin Edward Flynn; Company (in Liquidation): Ocean Time Development Limited; Company (in Liquidation): Goldgood Properties Limited; Company (in Liquidation): Tinson International Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 September 2006
Case Number
HCCW338/2004
Procedural Posture
Winding‑up Proceedings and Associated Civil Action (hccw 334/2004; 336/2004; 338/2004; HCA 1463/2005) / Ruling on Costs (post‑judgment Applications to Vary Costs Orders)
Outcome
Costs orders nisi varied in part as set out in the reasons; indemnity costs awarded to liquidators for striking out and action; certification for two counsel granted for appeals costs.
Legal Topics
Liquidators' Costs, Proofs of Debt, Strike Out, Indemnity Costs, Recoupment From Company Assets, Section 276 Companies Ordinance
Source Language
EN
Company Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Costs Liquidators' Costs Proofs of Debt Strike Out Indemnity Costs +2 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grand Gain Investment Limited

Plaintiff / Creditor

Cosimo Borrelli

1st Defendant / Liquidator

Kelvin Edward Flynn

2nd Defendant / Liquidator

Ocean Time Development Limited

Company (in Liquidation)

Goldgood Properties Limited

Company (in Liquidation)

Tinson International Limited

Company (in Liquidation)

Procedural Posture

Winding‑up Proceedings and Associated Civil Action (hccw 334/2004; 336/2004; 338/2004; HCA 1463/2005) / Ruling on Costs (post‑judgment Applications to Vary Costs Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order should be certified for two counsel
  2. 2 Whether costs payable by liquidators may be met from the assets of the companies in liquidation
  3. 3 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded to liquidators in respect of the striking out and the action

Ratio Decidendi

The costs orders nisi were varied: the appeals against rejection of proofs of debt were certified as fit for two counsel; the liquidators must pay Grand Gain 90% of its costs of the appeals (taxed on a party and party basis) and may meet that liability from the assets of the companies insofar as assets suffice; each party bears its own costs of the unopposed applications to vary that order; Grand Gain must pay the liquidators' costs of the striking out application and of the action on an indemnity basis (taxable on indemnity if not agreed), and the costs of the application to vary that costs order are to be treated as part of the costs of the action and recoverable by the liquidators on...

Court Disposition

Costs orders nisi varied in part as set out in the reasons; indemnity costs awarded to liquidators for striking out and action; certification for two counsel granted for appeals costs.

Orders

  • The costs order as to the appeals is varied to certify the matter fit for two counsel.
  • The liquidators are to pay Grand Gain 90% of Grand Gain's costs of the appeals, to be taxed on the party and party basis, and the liquidators may meet that liability out of the assets of the companies insofar as those assets suffice.