CHEUNG KI LAM 對 CHOI TAK TAI 及另一人

CHEUNG KI LAM 對 CHOI TAK TAI 及另一人

The court found the Order 22 payments (HK$1 on 29/10/2020 and HK$49,999 on 11/2/2022) were validly filed and served; the plaintiff did not accept them within the prescribed periods and failed to obtain a better result against the second defendant. It was not unjust to apply Rule 23, therefore the interim costs order was varied: plaintiff to pay second defendant party-and-party costs to 25 November 2020 and indemnity costs from 26 November 2020 (including wasted trial dates), and to pay interest on the indemnity costs at a rate 2% above the judgment rate; the court refused to order indemnity costs for the entire litigation as the claim against the second defendant was not wholly hopeless...

Citation
[2024] HKDC 2078
Parties
Plaintiff: CHEUNG KI LAM; First Defendant: CHOI TAK TAI; Second Defendant: HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED (in liquidation)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 December 2024
Case Number
DCPI2504/2019
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Post Trial Costs Application and Judgment
Outcome
Interim costs order varied in favour of second defendant in part; further ancillary payment ordered to be released
Legal Topics
Order 22 Payments, Costs on Indemnity Basis, Party and Party Costs, Interest on Costs, Costs Assessment by Taxing Officer
Source Language
CH
Civil Personal Injury Costs Civil Procedure Order 22 Payments Costs on Indemnity Basis Party and Party Costs Interest on Costs +1 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHEUNG KI LAM

Plaintiff

CHOI TAK TAI

First Defendant

HSIN CHONG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED (in liquidation)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Post Trial Costs Application and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff must pay second defendant's costs on indemnity (indemnity/弥偿) basis from 26 November 2020
  2. 2 Whether the Order 22 payments made by the second defendant were validly served and not accepted by the plaintiff and thus trigger rules for costs and interest
  3. 3 Whether making orders under Regional Court Rules Order 22/Rule 23 would be unjust in all the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the Order 22 payments (HK$1 on 29/10/2020 and HK$49,999 on 11/2/2022) were validly filed and served; the plaintiff did not accept them within the prescribed periods and failed to obtain a better result against the second defendant. It was not unjust to apply Rule 23, therefore the interim costs order was varied: plaintiff to pay second defendant party-and-party costs to 25 November 2020 and indemnity costs from 26 November 2020 (including wasted trial dates), and to pay interest on the indemnity costs at a rate 2% above the judgment rate; the court refused to order indemnity costs for the entire litigation as the claim against the second defendant was not wholly hopeless...

Court Disposition

Interim costs order varied in favour of second defendant in part; further ancillary payment ordered to be released

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay second defendant's costs on party-and-party basis up to and including 25 November 2020
  • Plaintiff to pay second defendant's costs on indemnity (弥偿) basis from 26 November 2020 (including costs arising from the adjourned trial dates 29, 30 and 31 March 2023)