COMPETITION COMMISSION v. FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING CO LTD

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING CO LTD

R1's objection lacked merit and, having withdrawn its submission, R1 must bear the costs occasioned by that objection; costs follow the event and the claimed quantum is reduced to amounts assessed by the Tribunal (HK$200,000 to the Applicant; HK$90,000 in aggregate allowed for R4, R6 and R7; HK$200 to each of R2, R3, R8 and R9).

Citation
[2020] HKCT 5
Parties
Applicant: Competition Commission; 1st Respondent: FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (馮氏機電工程有限公司); 2nd Respondent: YEE HING METAL SHOP (義興鐵器土木油漆工程); 3rd Respondent: CHEUNG MIN (張棉) trading as ACCORD CONSTRUCTION & DECORATION CO (雅閣建築裝修工程公司); 4th Respondent: HING SHING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (興盛建築公司); 5th Respondent: LUEN HOP DECORATION ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (聯合裝飾工程有限公司); 6th Respondent: DAO KEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED (陶記營造廠有限公司); 7th Respondent: WONG WAI CHUEN (黃偉銓); 8th Respondent: WONG FU SAN (黃富新); 9th Respondent: CHEUNG YUN KAM (張潤錦)
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 July 2020
Case Number
CTEA1/2019
Procedural Posture
Competition Enforcement (enforcement Action) / Costs Determination at Interlocutory Stage (decision on Procedural Objection and Costs)
Outcome
Costs awarded against 1st Respondent (FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED) to Applicant and to certain Respondents as specified.
Legal Topics
Market Sharing, Price Fixing, Costs, Carecraft Procedure, Admission of Liability, Procedural Objection
Source Language
EN
Competition Law Civil Procedure Market Sharing Price Fixing Costs Carecraft Procedure Admission of Liability Procedural Objection

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Competition Commission

Applicant

FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (馮氏機電工程有限公司)

1st Respondent

YEE HING METAL SHOP (義興鐵器土木油漆工程)

2nd Respondent

CHEUNG MIN (張棉) trading as ACCORD CONSTRUCTION & DECORATION CO (雅閣建築裝修工程公司)

3rd Respondent

HING SHING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (興盛建築公司)

4th Respondent

LUEN HOP DECORATION ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (聯合裝飾工程有限公司)

5th Respondent

DAO KEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED (陶記營造廠有限公司)

6th Respondent

WONG WAI CHUEN (黃偉銓)

7th Respondent

WONG FU SAN (黃富新)

8th Respondent

CHEUNG YUN KAM (張潤錦)

9th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Competition Enforcement (enforcement Action) / Costs Determination at Interlocutory Stage (decision on Procedural Objection and Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the same judge may deal with sanctioning admitting respondents and trying contesting respondents
  2. 2 Whether R1’s procedural objection exempted R1 from costs
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum of costs to be awarded to applicant and other respondents

Ratio Decidendi

R1's objection lacked merit and, having withdrawn its submission, R1 must bear the costs occasioned by that objection; costs follow the event and the claimed quantum is reduced to amounts assessed by the Tribunal (HK$200,000 to the Applicant; HK$90,000 in aggregate allowed for R4, R6 and R7; HK$200 to each of R2, R3, R8 and R9).

Court Disposition

Costs awarded against 1st Respondent (FUNGS E&M ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED) to Applicant and to certain Respondents as specified.

Orders

  • Order that R1 pay the Applicant (Competition Commission) costs of HK$200,000
  • Order that R1 pay costs in respect of the 4th, 6th and 7th Respondents in the aggregate amount of HK$90,000