CHEN LINGXIA v. 中國金谷國際信託有限責任公司 AND OTHERS

CHEN LINGXIA v. 中國金谷國際信託有限責任公司 AND OTHERS

The court held that no clarification of the costs order nisi was necessary because the existing order already covered the costs of the Summons, but varied the order nisi to direct that costs of and occasioned by the initial grant and the discharge of the Interim Injunctions (including JH's summons) be borne by Chen...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 913
Parties
Plaintiff: Chen; 1st Defendant: JI; 3rd 6th Defendants: JH and its nominees; 7th Defendant: South Asia
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 April 2019
Case Number
HCA2012/2018
Procedural Posture
Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi Following Interlocutory Injunction Proceedings / Variation of Costs Order Nisi After Decision on Interlocutory Relief (post Decision)
Outcome
Application to vary costs orders granted in part and refused in part: variation ordered to require Chen to pay specified costs on an indemnity basis, summary assessment refused, amendment applicants ordered to pay their amendment costs to Chen on party-and-party basis.
Legal Topics
Variation of Costs Order Nisi, Interim Injunction, Non Disclosure, Indemnity Costs, Summary Assessment of Costs, Amendment of Summons
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Costs Injunctions Variation of Costs Order Nisi Interim Injunction Non Disclosure Indemnity Costs Summary Assessment of Costs +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chen

Plaintiff

JI

1st Defendant

JH and its nominees

3rd 6th Defendants

South Asia

7th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Vary Costs Order Nisi Following Interlocutory Injunction Proceedings / Variation of Costs Order Nisi After Decision on Interlocutory Relief (post Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi required clarification or rectification to state that costs of the Summons be borne by Chen
  2. 2 Whether costs relating to the grant and discharge of the Interim Injunctions should be borne by Chen and assessed on an indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' costs should be summarily assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that no clarification of the costs order nisi was necessary because the existing order already covered the costs of the Summons, but varied the order nisi to direct that costs of and occasioned by the initial grant and the discharge of the Interim Injunctions (including JH's summons) be borne by Chen and paid to the defendants on an indemnity basis, taxed and paid forthwith; the court refused summary assessment and ordered that the costs of the defendants' variation applications (except the amendment application) be borne by Chen on an indemnity basis, while the costs of the amendment application be paid to Chen on the usual party-and-party basis.

Court Disposition

Application to vary costs orders granted in part and refused in part: variation ordered to require Chen to pay specified costs on an indemnity basis, summary assessment refused, amendment applicants ordered to pay their amendment costs to Chen on party-and-party basis.

Orders

  • No clarification of the costs order nisi required; existing order already covered costs of the Summons
  • Vary order nisi to order that the costs of and occasioned by the initial grant and the discharge of the Interim Injunctions (including JH's summons dated 13 September 2018) are to be borne by Chen and paid to the Defendants, with certificate for two counsel, to be taxed forthwith if not agreed, and paid forthwith,...