LAU YUE KUI, the administrator of the estate of LAU WAI CHAU, deceased AND OTHERS v. PHILIP CHAN & CO (a firm)

LAU YUE KUI, the administrator of the estate of LAU WAI CHAU, deceased AND OTHERS v. PHILIP CHAN & CO (a firm)

Applying Rule 5 and weighing all factors the Master found the matter was unusually complex, required special skill, involved significant responsibility and risk, and comparable market practice did not support imposing a regressive cap; the 2% fee under the 1st Fee Agreement was therefore reasonable and Bill No 1 was allowed in full at $20,000,000; after item-by-item scrutiny of Bill No 2 the Master found the time entries reasonable and allowed the claimed charges up to the agreed cap so Bill No 2 was allowed at the capped sum of $20,000,000; the respondent was entitled to normal interest without deduction.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2093
Parties
1st Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Wai Chau (deceased): Lau Yue Kui (劉汝蘧); 2nd Plaintiff Coadministrators of the Estate of Lau Leung Chau (deceased): Ma Wah Yan; Wong Chi Leung (馬華恩; 黃志良); 3rd Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Leung Kwai (deceased): Ma Wah Yan (馬華恩); 4th Plaintiff: Lau Yue Chiu (劉汝翹); 5th Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Leung Kui (deceased): Lau Yu Shing (劉愈成); 6th Plaintiff Coexecutors of the Will of Lau Leung Wa (deceased): Lau Yue Sum; Lau Yue Ting (劉汝深; 劉汝霆); Respondent Solicitors Who Rendered the Two Bills: Philip Chan & Co (a firm)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 September 2020
Case Number
HCMP593/2007
Procedural Posture
Taxation of Solicitor's Bills in Non Contentious Probate/administration Matters / Taxation Hearing and Decision (master's Decision on Taxation)
Outcome
Both solicitor's bills allowed in full subject to the agreed cap on Bill No 2; Bill No 1 taxed at $20,000,000; Bill No 2 taxed at the cap of $20,000,000; respondent entitled to normal interest without deduction; usual post‑taxation directions.
Legal Topics
Reasonableness of Fee Agreements, Gross Sum (lump Sum) Bills, Application of Value Factor in Costs Assessment, Onus in Solicitor and Own Client Taxation, Interest on Taxed Costs
Source Language
EN
Solicitors' Costs and Taxation Probate and Administration Estate Duty and Compulsory Resumption Civil Procedure — Costs Professional Conduct and Fee Agreements Reasonableness of Fee Agreements Gross Sum (lump Sum) Bills Application of Value Factor in Costs Assessment +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lau Yue Kui (劉汝蘧)

1st Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Wai Chau (deceased)

Ma Wah Yan; Wong Chi Leung (馬華恩; 黃志良)

2nd Plaintiff Coadministrators of the Estate of Lau Leung Chau (deceased)

Ma Wah Yan (馬華恩)

3rd Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Leung Kwai (deceased)

Lau Yue Chiu (劉汝翹)

4th Plaintiff

Lau Yu Shing (劉愈成)

5th Plaintiff Administrator of the Estate of Lau Leung Kui (deceased)

Lau Yue Sum; Lau Yue Ting (劉汝深; 劉汝霆)

6th Plaintiff Coexecutors of the Will of Lau Leung Wa (deceased)

Philip Chan & Co (a firm)

Respondent Solicitors Who Rendered the Two Bills

Procedural Posture

Taxation of Solicitor's Bills in Non Contentious Probate/administration Matters / Taxation Hearing and Decision (master's Decision on Taxation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2% flat fee in the 1st Fee Agreement was fair and reasonable
  2. 2 Whether a regressive scale should limit the value element of fees
  3. 3 Whether the time claimed in Bill No 2 was excessive or unreasonable and whether the capped sum was recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

Applying Rule 5 and weighing all factors the Master found the matter was unusually complex, required special skill, involved significant responsibility and risk, and comparable market practice did not support imposing a regressive cap; the 2% fee under the 1st Fee Agreement was therefore reasonable and Bill No 1 was allowed in full at $20,000,000; after item-by-item scrutiny of Bill No 2 the Master found the time entries reasonable and allowed the claimed charges up to the agreed cap so Bill No 2 was allowed at the capped sum of $20,000,000; the respondent was entitled to normal interest without deduction.

Court Disposition

Both solicitor's bills allowed in full subject to the agreed cap on Bill No 2; Bill No 1 taxed at $20,000,000; Bill No 2 taxed at the cap of $20,000,000; respondent entitled to normal interest without deduction; usual post‑taxation directions.

Orders

  • Bill No 1 taxed and allowed in full at HKD 20,000,000
  • Bill No 2 taxed and allowed up to the agreed cap at HKD 20,000,000