RE MADAM TAN

RE MADAM TAN

The receiving party failed to act with reasonable promptitude and there was an undue and inexcusable delay of approximately eight months in filing the bills of costs; proof of specific prejudice is not required because delay necessarily causes prejudice by accrual of interest; exercising the taxing master's discretion under RHC O62 r22(3) and r7(5) the court ordered a global reduction of 8% of each taxed bill and reinstated previously taxed-off items for re-consideration.

Citation
RE MADAM TAN
Parties
Plaintiffs: various financial institutions; 3rd Defendant (applicant): Madam Tan Bo Bo Brenda alias Tan Bo Bo
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 July 1999
Case Number
HCA6646/1994
Procedural Posture
Civil Taxation Review / Review of Taxation Reasons Delivered
Outcome
Review allowed in part. Court found undue/inexcusable delay and exercised discretion to reduce taxed costs by 8% in each of the four bills; items relating to costs of taxation previously disallowed were re-instated for reconsideration; further hearing ordered.
Legal Topics
Delay in Filing Bill of Costs, Charging Orders, Taxation of Costs, Court Discretion Under O.62 R22 and R7
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs and Taxation Property Enforcement Delay in Filing Bill of Costs Charging Orders Taxation of Costs Court Discretion Under O.62 R22 and R7

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

various financial institutions

Plaintiffs

Madam Tan Bo Bo Brenda alias Tan Bo Bo

3rd Defendant (applicant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Taxation Review / Review of Taxation Reasons Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the receiving party caused undue or inexcusable delay in filing bills of costs after costs orders
  2. 2 Whether proof of prejudice to the paying parties is required before exercising discretion under O.62 r22(3) and r7(5)
  3. 3 What sanction or reduction is appropriate for the delay

Ratio Decidendi

The receiving party failed to act with reasonable promptitude and there was an undue and inexcusable delay of approximately eight months in filing the bills of costs; proof of specific prejudice is not required because delay necessarily causes prejudice by accrual of interest; exercising the taxing master's discretion under RHC O62 r22(3) and r7(5) the court ordered a global reduction of 8% of each taxed bill and reinstated previously taxed-off items for re-consideration.

Court Disposition

Review allowed in part. Court found undue/inexcusable delay and exercised discretion to reduce taxed costs by 8% in each of the four bills; items relating to costs of taxation previously disallowed were re-instated for reconsideration; further hearing ordered.

Orders

  • Global reduction of 8% of the taxed bill of costs in each of the four Bills
  • All items relating to costs of taxation in the Bills previously taxed off are re-instated for reconsideration