ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. NGO KUI SING AND OTHERS

ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. NGO KUI SING AND OTHERS

The tribunal applied the compensation approach from Good Faith but retained a broad discretionary assessment of costs rather than an automatic shift based solely on the fact that an offer exceeded the tribunal assessment. On the facts the five respondents deliberately embraced an exaggerated EUV (principally via Mr Siu) and pursued an unsupportable 'hope value' (via Ms Sat), causing wasted time and expense. The appropriate cut-off for costs entitlement was fixed as the day before trial (1 March 2015); consequently the five respondents are disallowed certain expert and related legal costs and must bear significant portions of the Applicants' costs from trial, with specified apportionments...

Citation
ORIENTAL GENERATION LTD AND OTHERS v. NGO KUI SING AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Applicant: Oriental Generation Limited; 2nd Applicant: China Creation Investment Limited; 3rd Applicant: Smart Beauty Limited; 4th Applicant: Wong Wing Wah; 22nd Respondent: Get Luck Investment Limited; 33rd Respondent: Wong Yuen Mei; 34th Respondent: Woon Su Sang; 40th Respondent: (Name recorded as) 40th Respondent (R40); 44th Respondent: Regal Effort Limited; 47th Respondent: Law Siu Lung
Court
Lands Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 October 2016
Case Number
LDCS4000/2013
Procedural Posture
Land (compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) Ordinance Application / Determination on Costs After Judgment Granting Order for Sale
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied: main application between Applicants and the five respondents – no order as to costs (to save further taxation) but specified disallowances and payment liabilities recorded; costs-variation application – costs nisi in favour of Applicants against the five respondents, joint and several, on...
Legal Topics
Compulsory Sale, Valuation Disputes, Expert Evidence, Offers and Costs, Costs Allocation, Conduct of Parties
Source Language
EN
Property Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Evidence Law Compulsory Sale Valuation Disputes Expert Evidence Offers and Costs +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oriental Generation Limited

1st Applicant

China Creation Investment Limited

2nd Applicant

Smart Beauty Limited

3rd Applicant

Wong Wing Wah

4th Applicant

Get Luck Investment Limited

22nd Respondent

Wong Yuen Mei

33rd Respondent

Woon Su Sang

34th Respondent

(Name recorded as) 40th Respondent (R40)

40th Respondent

Regal Effort Limited

44th Respondent

Law Siu Lung

47th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land (compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) Ordinance Application / Determination on Costs After Judgment Granting Order for Sale

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied and the extent of costs payable
  2. 2 Whether the minority respondents became "unsuccessful" for costs purposes after an open offer and the appropriate cut-off date for costs liability
  3. 3 Whether expert valuation evidence (Mr Siu and Ms Sat) was unreliable or improperly relied upon and whether related expert/legal costs should be disallowed

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal applied the compensation approach from Good Faith but retained a broad discretionary assessment of costs rather than an automatic shift based solely on the fact that an offer exceeded the tribunal assessment. On the facts the five respondents deliberately embraced an exaggerated EUV (principally via Mr Siu) and pursued an unsupportable 'hope value' (via Ms Sat), causing wasted time and expense. The appropriate cut-off for costs entitlement was fixed as the day before trial (1 March 2015); consequently the five respondents are disallowed certain expert and related legal costs and must bear significant portions of the Applicants' costs from trial, with specified apportionments...

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied: main application between Applicants and the five respondents – no order as to costs (to save further taxation) but specified disallowances and payment liabilities recorded; costs-variation application – costs nisi in favour of Applicants against the five respondents, joint and several, on...

Orders

  • The five respondents are entitled to costs up to and inclusive of 1 March 2015 with certificate for one counsel for each represented team taxed on District Court scale;
  • Disallow all fees of Mr Keith Siu (valuation expert relied on by R22/R33/R34) and all legal costs incurred by respondents resulting from reliance on Mr Siu's EUV reports;