CHINA MERCHANTS KIN SWISS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. TREASURE WISE LTD AND OTHERS

CHINA MERCHANTS KIN SWISS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. TREASURE WISE LTD AND OTHERS

Application dismissed. The judge held the slip rule (Order 20 r.11) and the court's inherent jurisdiction are confined to correcting clerical errors expressing the court's manifest intention; they do not permit insertion of substantive provisions or correction of an omission that was not a slip. The costs orders' language is conventional and the appropriate forum for determining allowance of costs for inadmissible expert evidence is the taxing master, with taxation to be concluded before any variation is sought.

Citation
CHINA MERCHANTS KIN SWISS TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. TREASURE WISE LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: China Merchants Kin Swiss Transportation Company Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Orienture Industries Limited; 1st Defendant: Treasure Wise Limited; 2nd Defendant: Luen Fat Tannery Limited; 3rd Defendant: Luen Tai Leather Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 November 2009
Case Number
HCA344/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Costs Dispute Following Trial / Post Trial Application Under Order 20 R.11 and Inherent Jurisdiction to Vary Costs Order (taxation Pending)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Correction of Judgment, Taxation of Costs, Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Inherent Jurisdiction, Slip Rule
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs and Taxation Evidence Correction of Judgment Taxation of Costs Admissibility of Expert Evidence Inherent Jurisdiction Slip Rule

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

China Merchants Kin Swiss Transportation Company Limited

1st Plaintiff

Orienture Industries Limited

2nd Plaintiff

Treasure Wise Limited

1st Defendant

Luen Fat Tannery Limited

2nd Defendant

Luen Tai Leather Company Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Costs Dispute Following Trial / Post Trial Application Under Order 20 R.11 and Inherent Jurisdiction to Vary Costs Order (taxation Pending)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether application falls within Order 20 r.11 or the court's inherent jurisdiction to vary a costs order
  2. 2 Whether costs of plaintiffs' inadmissible expert evidence are recoverable on party-and-party taxation
  3. 3 Whether the court may use the slip rule to insert a certificate for two counsel or other substantive provision not originally ordered

Ratio Decidendi

Application dismissed. The judge held the slip rule (Order 20 r.11) and the court's inherent jurisdiction are confined to correcting clerical errors expressing the court's manifest intention; they do not permit insertion of substantive provisions or correction of an omission that was not a slip. The costs orders' language is conventional and the appropriate forum for determining allowance of costs for inadmissible expert evidence is the taxing master, with taxation to be concluded before any variation is sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • No variation of the costs orders under Order 20 r.11 or the court's inherent jurisdiction; taxation to be concluded by the taxing master