莫懿 v. 宏大香港資產管理有限公司AND OTHERS

莫懿 v. 宏大香港資產管理有限公司AND OTHERS

The court refused the application to vary the costs order nisi because the affirmations and other costs of the O.14 summons were unlikely to form part of the costs of any future trial and the costs incurred were not related to future trial preparation; therefore the costs order nisi was made absolute and the applicant must bear the costs of the O.14 summons and the variation application, with directions for a fresh statement of costs and summary assessment on the papers.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3832
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): 莫懿; 1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim): 宏大香港資產管理有限公司; 2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim): 陳宏; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): DENG ZHI（鄧智）
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 December 2021
Case Number
HCA897/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (contract) / Costs Variation Application After Decision (post Judgment)
Outcome
Application to vary costs order refused; costs order nisi made absolute.
Legal Topics
Variation of Costs Order, Costs in the Cause Vs Costs Nisi, Summary Assessment, O.14 Summons
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Contract Variation of Costs Order Costs in the Cause Vs Costs Nisi Summary Assessment O.14 Summons

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

莫懿

Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

宏大香港資產管理有限公司

1st Defendant (original Action); 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim)

陳宏

2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim)

DENG ZHI（鄧智）

2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (contract) / Costs Variation Application After Decision (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied to costs in the cause
  2. 2 Whether costs of the interlocutory O.14 summons properly form part of the costs of the main action
  3. 3 Whether the applicant pursued the summons reasonably and expeditiously

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the application to vary the costs order nisi because the affirmations and other costs of the O.14 summons were unlikely to form part of the costs of any future trial and the costs incurred were not related to future trial preparation; therefore the costs order nisi was made absolute and the applicant must bear the costs of the O.14 summons and the variation application, with directions for a fresh statement of costs and summary assessment on the papers.

Court Disposition

Application to vary costs order refused; costs order nisi made absolute.

Orders

  • Applicant Mo shall bear the costs of the O.14 Summons and of the present application for variation
  • GCAM and Chen shall prepare a fresh Statement of Costs including the costs of both the O.14 Summons and the variation application, to be filed and served within 7 days from the date of the decision