PROGETTO JEWELLERY CO LTD v. LAU CHIU YING AND ANOTHER

PROGETTO JEWELLERY CO LTD v. LAU CHIU YING AND ANOTHER

The application was dismissed because it was filed late without any application for extension or explanation for delay; the applicant's procedural mistake and misunderstanding did not justify reopening the costs decision; there was no error of law or fact in the original costs assessment and no further reduction was warranted given the court had already reduced costs for the respondent's conduct.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2098
Parties
Plaintiff (original); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): Progetto Jewellery Company Limited; 1st Defendant (original); Applicant: Lau Chiu Ying; 2nd Defendant (original); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Joy Design Company Limited; 1st Defendant (counterclaim): Fung Pui Wa
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 July 2021
Case Number
HCA2548/2014
Procedural Posture
Application to Vary Costs Order Following Dismissal of an Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Variation Application (application Made Out of Time)
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Extension of Time, Self Representation, Language of Proceedings, Discretionary Relief
Source Language
CH
Civil Procedure Costs Law Appeal Procedure Language Rights in Proceedings Costs Orders Extension of Time Self Representation Language of Proceedings +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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Progetto Jewellery Company Limited

Plaintiff (original); 2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

Lau Chiu Ying

1st Defendant (original); Applicant

Joy Design Company Limited

2nd Defendant (original); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

Fung Pui Wa

1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Application to Vary Costs Order Following Dismissal of an Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Variation Application (application Made Out of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant had reasonable excuse for delay in bringing the application to vary the costs order
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to vary the existing costs order
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's misunderstanding about liability for costs and procedural errors justified re-opening the costs decision

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because it was filed late without any application for extension or explanation for delay; the applicant's procedural mistake and misunderstanding did not justify reopening the costs decision; there was no error of law or fact in the original costs assessment and no further reduction was warranted given the court had already reduced costs for the respondent's conduct.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant

Orders

  • Application to vary the interim costs order dismissed
  • Applicant (Lau Chiu Ying) ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of this application, summarily assessed at HKD 5,200