BOTHLINK LTD v. KING GLARE LTD AND ANOTHER

BOTHLINK LTD v. KING GLARE LTD AND ANOTHER

Application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the original claim exceeded District Court jurisdiction at the time of transfer, the claim against King Glare regarding Temporary and New Structures was not unreasonable on the pleaded facts, alleged delays were minimal and did not justify variation, and the certificate for two counsel was not properly before the application; accordingly King Glare must pay Bothlink's costs of the application to be taxed if not agreed.

Citation
BOTHLINK LTD v. KING GLARE LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Bothlink Limited; 1st Defendant: King Glare Limited; 2nd Defendant: Convey Advertising Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 March 2015
Case Number
HCA1978/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (licence/mesne Profits Dispute) / Judgment on Costs Following Trial and Application to Vary Costs Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Order, Variation of Costs, District Court Jurisdiction, Mesne Profits, Certificate for Two Counsel, Party Conduct
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Property Law Contract/licence Costs Order Variation of Costs District Court Jurisdiction Mesne Profits +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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bothlink Limited

Plaintiff

King Glare Limited

1st Defendant

Convey Advertising Company Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (licence/mesne Profits Dispute) / Judgment on Costs Following Trial and Application to Vary Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied so King Glare pays only 10% of Bothlink's costs
  2. 2 Whether Bothlink's claim should have been tried in the District Court so as to justify reduction of its costs
  3. 3 Whether the claim against King Glare in respect of Temporary and New Structures was unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the original claim exceeded District Court jurisdiction at the time of transfer, the claim against King Glare regarding Temporary and New Structures was not unreasonable on the pleaded facts, alleged delays were minimal and did not justify variation, and the certificate for two counsel was not properly before the application; accordingly King Glare must pay Bothlink's costs of the application to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Order nisi confirming that King Glare and Convey shall pay Bothlink's costs of the earlier judgment, to be taxed if not agreed, with certificate for two counsel (as per earlier judgment)
  • King Glare's application to vary the costs order nisi is dismissed