WGL v. ASB

WGL v. ASB

The court exercised its discretion under Order 38 RHC and applied the usual practice that costs of a single joint expert are to be shared equally. The SJE Report materially assisted the court, the mother did not appeal or cross-examine the expert and provided little documentary evidence, and there was no reason to depart from equal apportionment; accordingly the Father's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi was allowed and the SJE costs were ordered to be borne equally by the parties.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1956
Parties
Applicant (father): WGL; Respondent (mother): ASB
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 August 2019
Case Number
HCMP489/2013
Procedural Posture
Guardianship of Minors Proceedings / Post Trial Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi (costs of Single Joint Expert)
Outcome
Application allowed: costs of the single joint expert to be borne equally by the parties.
Legal Topics
Single Joint Expert, Allocation of Expert Fees, Variation of Costs Order Nisi, Best Interests of the Child, Court Discretion on Expert Costs
Source Language
EN
Family Law Guardianship Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Costs Single Joint Expert Allocation of Expert Fees Variation of Costs Order Nisi +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WGL

Applicant (father)

ASB

Respondent (mother)

Procedural Posture

Guardianship of Minors Proceedings / Post Trial Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi (costs of Single Joint Expert)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs of the single joint expert should be apportioned equally between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the Costs Order Nisi should be varied to expressly deal with the SJE's fees
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under Order 38 RHC having regard to the best interests of the child

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion under Order 38 RHC and applied the usual practice that costs of a single joint expert are to be shared equally. The SJE Report materially assisted the court, the mother did not appeal or cross-examine the expert and provided little documentary evidence, and there was no reason to depart from equal apportionment; accordingly the Father's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi was allowed and the SJE costs were ordered to be borne equally by the parties.

Court Disposition

Application allowed: costs of the single joint expert to be borne equally by the parties.

Orders

  • The costs of the single joint expert, Mr Frank Yuen of Corporate Advisory and Recovery Limited, are to be borne by the parties in equal shares.