ATLANTIC LINK LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF YEN YING BUILDING AND OTHERS

ATLANTIC LINK LTD v. THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF YEN YING BUILDING AND OTHERS

Although the Appeal was allowed and the Defendants were successful, the court declined to vary the costs order nisi to award indemnity costs of the Appeal. The court found it was reasonable for the Defendants to pursue the Appeal; the plaintiff's resistance was not justified but, on balance of all circumstances including prior orders penalising the Defendants (denial of recovery of costs and indemnity for wasted report), there was no sufficient basis to order indemnity costs for the Appeal. The plaintiff's application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the Defendants' costs of the summons dated 15 November 2019.

Citation
[2019] HKDC 1744
Parties
Plaintiff: ATLANTIC LINK LIMITED; 1st Defendant: THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF YEN YING BUILDING; 2nd Defendant: FULLWILL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: TSE SIK HUNG DAVID; 4th Defendant: POON YUN TAI, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LO MING SUN, DECEASED; 5th Defendant: J-BO COMPANY LIMITED; 6th Defendant: WONG YUE MING WILLIAM & LO LAI YI; 7th Defendant: HO LUNG WAI STANLEY; 8th Defendant: LEE FUNG YING; 9th Defendant: FAST ACCESS LIMITED; 10th Defendant: KOSWO LIMITED; 11th Defendant: BOPPS INVESTMENTS LIMITED; 12th Defendant: FULL ASSET LIMITED; 13rd Defendant: LAM KIT CHUN LINDA; 14th Defendant: TUNG WAH GROUP OF HOSPITALS; 15th Defendant: WONG LAN SIN
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 January 2019
Case Number
DCCJ1306/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Interlocutory Appeal From Master's Order / Post Appeal Variation of Costs Order Application (decision on Summons Dated 15 November 2019)
Outcome
Application to vary the costs order nisi dismissed; existing costs order nisi remains; plaintiff ordered to pay Defendants' costs of the Summons dated 15 November 2019.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Indemnity Costs, Extension of Time, Wasted Expert Report, Reasonableness of Conduct
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Expert Evidence Case Management Appeal Costs Orders Indemnity Costs Extension of Time +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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ATLANTIC LINK LIMITED

Plaintiff

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF YEN YING BUILDING

1st Defendant

FULLWILL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED

2nd Defendant

TSE SIK HUNG DAVID

3rd Defendant

POON YUN TAI, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LO MING SUN, DECEASED

4th Defendant

J-BO COMPANY LIMITED

5th Defendant

WONG YUE MING WILLIAM & LO LAI YI

6th Defendant

HO LUNG WAI STANLEY

7th Defendant

LEE FUNG YING

8th Defendant

FAST ACCESS LIMITED

9th Defendant

KOSWO LIMITED

10th Defendant

BOPPS INVESTMENTS LIMITED

11th Defendant

FULL ASSET LIMITED

12th Defendant

LAM KIT CHUN LINDA

13rd Defendant

TUNG WAH GROUP OF HOSPITALS

14th Defendant

WONG LAN SIN

15th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Interlocutory Appeal From Master's Order / Post Appeal Variation of Costs Order Application (decision on Summons Dated 15 November 2019)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to vary the costs order nisi made on 15 November 2019
  2. 2 Whether costs of the Appeal should be awarded on an indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether the successful defendants should nevertheless bear costs because of unreasonable conduct

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Appeal was allowed and the Defendants were successful, the court declined to vary the costs order nisi to award indemnity costs of the Appeal. The court found it was reasonable for the Defendants to pursue the Appeal; the plaintiff's resistance was not justified but, on balance of all circumstances including prior orders penalising the Defendants (denial of recovery of costs and indemnity for wasted report), there was no sufficient basis to order indemnity costs for the Appeal. The plaintiff's application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the Defendants' costs of the summons dated 15 November 2019.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the costs order nisi dismissed; existing costs order nisi remains; plaintiff ordered to pay Defendants' costs of the Summons dated 15 November 2019.

Orders

  • Application to vary costs order nisi dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay the Defendants' costs of and occasioned by the Summons dated 15 November 2019