CHAN YEUK NAM AND OTHERS v. CHAN YEUK SHAN

CHAN YEUK NAM AND OTHERS v. CHAN YEUK SHAN

The court ordered indemnity assessment of the plaintiffs' costs because the defendant unreasonably issued and then withdrew the Stay Summons, engineered a de facto stay in breach of the court's order and her solicitors acted unreasonably; the defendant was not ordered to pay the respondent's costs because the respondent was not a party or served with the Stay Summons; the plaintiffs' indemnity costs were summarily assessed at HKD 181,000.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1275
Parties
1st Plaintiff: CHAN YEUK NAM; 2nd Plaintiff: CHAN YEUK LIN ISABELLA; 3rd Plaintiff: O-YOUNG ANGELA YEUK KING; 4th Plaintiff: CHAN YEUK YU MARY; 5th Plaintiff: CHAN YEUK MAN; Defendant (executrix and in Own Capacity): CHAN YEUK SHAN; Respondent (administrator): WONG TAK SHING
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 May 2022
Case Number
HCMP1530/2020
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Plaintiffs' costs payable by the defendant to be assessed on an indemnity basis; defendant not ordered to pay respondent's costs in respect of the Stay Summons; plaintiffs' indemnity costs summarily assessed at HKD 181,000.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Summary Assessment of Costs, Indemnity Costs, Administration of Estate
Source Language
EN
Probate Civil Procedure Costs Stay of Execution Summary Assessment of Costs Indemnity Costs Administration of Estate

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN YEUK NAM

1st Plaintiff

CHAN YEUK LIN ISABELLA

2nd Plaintiff

O-YOUNG ANGELA YEUK KING

3rd Plaintiff

CHAN YEUK YU MARY

4th Plaintiff

CHAN YEUK MAN

5th Plaintiff

CHAN YEUK SHAN

Defendant (executrix and in Own Capacity)

WONG TAK SHING

Respondent (administrator)

Procedural Posture

Probate and Administration / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs' costs payable by the defendant should be assessed on an indemnity basis or party-and-party basis
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be ordered to pay the respondent's costs in relation to the Stay Summons
  3. 3 Quantum of plaintiffs' costs payable by the defendant to be summarily assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered indemnity assessment of the plaintiffs' costs because the defendant unreasonably issued and then withdrew the Stay Summons, engineered a de facto stay in breach of the court's order and her solicitors acted unreasonably; the defendant was not ordered to pay the respondent's costs because the respondent was not a party or served with the Stay Summons; the plaintiffs' indemnity costs were summarily assessed at HKD 181,000.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' costs payable by the defendant to be assessed on an indemnity basis; defendant not ordered to pay respondent's costs in respect of the Stay Summons; plaintiffs' indemnity costs summarily assessed at HKD 181,000.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' costs payable by the defendant are to be assessed on an indemnity basis.
  • The defendant is to personally bear the plaintiffs' costs (to be summarily assessed).