CWG v. MH AND OTHERS

CWG v. MH AND OTHERS

Court exercised its discretion under family costs principles and O 62 r 5, finding that the wife was the overall successful party and that the husband and R2 had engaged in material non-disclosure and conduct that increased costs. The Order Nisi was varied: husband to pay all the wife's costs of the Part IIA application, reserved costs, subpoena costs, joinder costs and Variation Summons; R2 liable for 75% of the wife's costs from date of her joinder (14 May 2012) including subpoenas and Variation Summons, jointly and severally with the husband but not liable for Joinder Costs; husband solely liable for costs of R3-R6; costs taxed party and party with certificate for two counsel; costs of...

Citation
CWG v. MH AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: CWG; 1st Respondent: MH; 2nd Respondent: WH; 3rd Respondent: MVF LIMITED; 4th Respondent: WM; 5th Respondent: EH; 6th Respondent: LS LIMITED; 7th Respondent: BM
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 September 2013
Case Number
HCMP643/2012
Procedural Posture
Family Ancillary Relief (part Iia) / Costs Variation Hearing Ruling
Outcome
Order Nisi varied in favour of the wife as to costs allocation
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Joinder Costs, Disclosure/non Disclosure, Variation of Costs Order, Subpoenas, Part IIA Application, Maintenance and Financial Relief
Source Language
EN
Family Law Civil Procedure Costs Trusts and Company Law Evidence Costs Orders Joinder Costs Disclosure/non Disclosure +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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CWG

Applicant

MH

1st Respondent

WH

2nd Respondent

MVF LIMITED

3rd Respondent

WM

4th Respondent

EH

5th Respondent

LS LIMITED

6th Respondent

BM

7th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Ancillary Relief (part Iia) / Costs Variation Hearing Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should follow the event in family ancillary relief proceedings and extent of court's discretion
  2. 2 Whether the husband and R2 should be jointly and severally liable for the wife's costs and in what proportions
  3. 3 Whether Joinder Costs and subpoena costs should be borne by the husband, R2 or the wife

Ratio Decidendi

Court exercised its discretion under family costs principles and O 62 r 5, finding that the wife was the overall successful party and that the husband and R2 had engaged in material non-disclosure and conduct that increased costs. The Order Nisi was varied: husband to pay all the wife's costs of the Part IIA application, reserved costs, subpoena costs, joinder costs and Variation Summons; R2 liable for 75% of the wife's costs from date of her joinder (14 May 2012) including subpoenas and Variation Summons, jointly and severally with the husband but not liable for Joinder Costs; husband solely liable for costs of R3-R6; costs taxed party and party with certificate for two counsel; costs of...

Court Disposition

Order Nisi varied in favour of the wife as to costs allocation

Orders

  • Husband to pay all the wife's costs of and incidental to the Part IIA application, including reserved costs under the order of 14 May 2012, costs of the Variation Summons, Subpoena Costs, Joinder Costs and related reserved costs orders of 21 May 2012, 29 June 2012 and 17 September 2012; credit to husband for costs...
  • R2 to pay 75% of the wife's costs of and incidental to the Part IIA application (including reserved costs under 14 May 2012), costs of the Variation Summons and Subpoena Costs, from 14 May 2012 onwards, jointly and severally with the husband; R2 not liable for the wife's Joinder Costs