SUN YAN v. SUPERB JADE LTD AND OTHERS

SUN YAN v. SUPERB JADE LTD AND OTHERS

The court varied the original Nisi Order: Super Jade was not ordered to pay Sun's costs of the Original Claim because Sun was found to be the beneficial owner of Super Jade; however Super Jade must pay SWS's costs of the Counterclaim on an indemnity basis because Super Jade contractually agreed to indemnify SWS in the account opening Terms and Conditions and Lin authorised the relevant representations; costs of Sun and Shum in the Counterclaim are to be paid by Lin on a party-and-party basis; certificates for two counsel were permitted where indemnity costs were ordered; and Sun was ordered to pay costs of the two costs applications.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2650
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Sun; 1st Plaintiff (counterclaim); Corporate Defendant/subject Company: Super Jade; 2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim): Lin; 3rd Defendant (original Action): Tang; 4th Defendant (original Action): Brother Zhao; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): SWS; 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Shum
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 October 2023
Case Number
HCA813/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim and Counterclaim (costs Applications Post Judgment) / Reasons for Decision on Costs (post Judgment)
Outcome
Nisi Order varied as set out in reasons for decision on costs.
Legal Topics
Costs Order, Indemnity Costs, Party and Party Costs, Certificate for Counsel, Beneficial Ownership, Contractual Indemnity, Misrepresentation
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Contract Equity Company Law Costs Order Indemnity Costs Party and Party Costs +4 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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sun

Plaintiff (original Action); 1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Super Jade

1st Plaintiff (counterclaim); Corporate Defendant/subject Company

Lin

2nd Defendant (original Action); 2nd Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Tang

3rd Defendant (original Action)

Brother Zhao

4th Defendant (original Action)

SWS

2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Shum

3rd Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim and Counterclaim (costs Applications Post Judgment) / Reasons for Decision on Costs (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Super Jade should be ordered to pay costs of the Original Claim
  2. 2 Whether Super Jade should be ordered to pay costs of the Counterclaim
  3. 3 Whether SWS is entitled to indemnity costs and certificate for two counsel

Ratio Decidendi

The court varied the original Nisi Order: Super Jade was not ordered to pay Sun's costs of the Original Claim because Sun was found to be the beneficial owner of Super Jade; however Super Jade must pay SWS's costs of the Counterclaim on an indemnity basis because Super Jade contractually agreed to indemnify SWS in the account opening Terms and Conditions and Lin authorised the relevant representations; costs of Sun and Shum in the Counterclaim are to be paid by Lin on a party-and-party basis; certificates for two counsel were permitted where indemnity costs were ordered; and Sun was ordered to pay costs of the two costs applications.

Court Disposition

Nisi Order varied as set out in reasons for decision on costs.

Orders

  • Costs of the Original Claim to be paid by the 2nd to 4th Defendants (Lin, Tang and Brother Zhao) to the Plaintiff (Sun)
  • Costs of the 2nd Defendant in the Counterclaim (SWS) to be paid by the Plaintiffs in the Counterclaim (Super Jade and Lin) to be taxed on an indemnity basis