TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE, THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF GUTING, JOAN SARMIENTO, DECEASED v. CHOY CHIU YEE RITA

TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE, THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF GUTING, JOAN SARMIENTO, DECEASED v. CHOY CHIU YEE RITA

The Respondent did not discharge the burden to show the actions were frivolous or that special circumstances existed to displace the default no‑costs rule in respect of the discrimination proceedings; however, on a broad‑brush assessment and given overlap with the employment claim, the costs order nisi was varied so that the Claimant must pay 25% of the costs of the consolidated actions with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed, with the Claimant's legal aid costs taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.

Citation
[2024] HKDC 1589
Parties
Claimant/plaintiff: TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE (Executrix of the Estate of GUTING, Joan Sarmiento, deceased); Respondent/defendant: CHOY CHIU YEE RITA
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 October 2024
Case Number
DCCJ3408/2020
Procedural Posture
Equal Opportunities Action and Employment Civil Action (consolidated) / Post‑trial Costs Application; Decision on Costs
Outcome
Order varied: Claimant to pay a portion of Respondent's costs; otherwise no order as to costs of the application; costs order nisi to become absolute in 14 days unless varied
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Costs Orders in Discrimination Proceedings, Special Circumstances for Costs, Frivolous/malicious Proceedings, Weight of Hearsay Evidence, Settlement Offers
Source Language
EN
Discrimination Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Costs Law Disability Discrimination Costs Orders in Discrimination Proceedings Special Circumstances for Costs +3 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TEMPOROSA, MA. CARLA ARANGOTE (Executrix of the Estate of GUTING, Joan Sarmiento, deceased)

Claimant/plaintiff

CHOY CHIU YEE RITA

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Equal Opportunities Action and Employment Civil Action (consolidated) / Post‑trial Costs Application; Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default no‑costs rule in disability discrimination proceedings should be displaced
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings were frivolous or malicious
  3. 3 Whether 'special circumstances' existed to justify an adverse costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondent did not discharge the burden to show the actions were frivolous or that special circumstances existed to displace the default no‑costs rule in respect of the discrimination proceedings; however, on a broad‑brush assessment and given overlap with the employment claim, the costs order nisi was varied so that the Claimant must pay 25% of the costs of the consolidated actions with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed, with the Claimant's legal aid costs taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.

Court Disposition

Order varied: Claimant to pay a portion of Respondent's costs; otherwise no order as to costs of the application; costs order nisi to become absolute in 14 days unless varied

Orders

  • Vary costs order nisi: Claimant to pay 25% of the costs of the consolidated actions to the Respondent with certificate for counsel, to be taxed on party and party basis if not agreed
  • Claimant's own costs to be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations