TAI CHAU YUNG AND ANOTHER v. NG JIM AND ANOTHER

TAI CHAU YUNG AND ANOTHER v. NG JIM AND ANOTHER

Court exercised discretion to award costs on a common fund basis because established practice supports it for infant plaintiffs, there was no unreasonable conduct by the plaintiff, the majority of the settlement benefitted infants, and s.32 of the Legal Aid Ordinance permits recovery/contribution by the Legal Aid Director; the order was necessary to ensure infants are adequately compensated and the approval application was inevitable.

Citation
TAI CHAU YUNG AND ANOTHER v. NG JIM AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff (administratrix): Tai Chau Yung; Plaintiff (administratrix): Chu Yau; 1st Defendant: Ng Jim; 2nd Defendant: The Urban Council
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 September 1998
Case Number
HCPI753/1997
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action / Application for Court Approval of Settlement, Apportionment and Costs (post Payment Into Court)
Outcome
Settlement approved and costs awarded to plaintiff on a common fund basis; apportionment and investment orders made
Legal Topics
Settlement Approval, Common Fund Costs, Infant Plaintiffs, Apportionment of Damages, Legal Aid Contribution, Investment of Infant Funds
Source Language
EN
Personal Injury Civil Procedure Costs Legal Aid Settlement Approval Common Fund Costs Infant Plaintiffs Apportionment of Damages +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tai Chau Yung

Plaintiff (administratrix)

Chu Yau

Plaintiff (administratrix)

Ng Jim

1st Defendant

The Urban Council

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action / Application for Court Approval of Settlement, Apportionment and Costs (post Payment Into Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded on a common fund basis for infant plaintiffs when settlement is accepted
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's legal aid status negates the need for common fund costs
  3. 3 Proper apportionment and investment of settlement monies for infant dependants

Ratio Decidendi

Court exercised discretion to award costs on a common fund basis because established practice supports it for infant plaintiffs, there was no unreasonable conduct by the plaintiff, the majority of the settlement benefitted infants, and s.32 of the Legal Aid Ordinance permits recovery/contribution by the Legal Aid Director; the order was necessary to ensure infants are adequately compensated and the approval application was inevitable.

Court Disposition

Settlement approved and costs awarded to plaintiff on a common fund basis; apportionment and investment orders made

Orders

  • Approval of acceptance of $450,000 paid into Court in full satisfaction of the plaintiff's claim
  • Apportionment of $450,000 as follows: $100,000 to the widow, $100,000 to the elder child, $245,000 to the younger child, $5,000 to the mother‑in‑law