KWOK HIN CHEUNG AND ANOTHER v. KWOK HIN TAK AND OTHERS

KWOK HIN CHEUNG AND ANOTHER v. KWOK HIN TAK AND OTHERS

Leave to discontinue was granted. Applying the general rule and departing from it for conduct after 30 March 2006, the court ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings up to 30 March 2006 (to be taxed if not agreed); for costs after 30 March 2006 each side must bear their own costs (no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
KWOK HIN CHEUNG AND ANOTHER v. KWOK HIN TAK AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: KWOK HIN CHEUNG; 2nd Plaintiff: LO KIN TUNG; 1st Defendant: KWOK HIN TAK; 2nd Defendant: CHONG SAU PUI; 3rd Defendant: SAN KWAN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 December 2006
Case Number
HCMP3156/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil (high Court) Application for Leave to Discontinue Under Order 21 R 3 / Interlocutory Summons Heard in Chambers
Outcome
Leave to discontinue granted; costs allocated as ordered below.
Legal Topics
Discontinuance, Costs Allocation, Leave to Discontinue, Irregular Service, Duplicate Proceedings, Strike Out
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Costs Abuse of Process Service of Process Discontinuance Costs Allocation Leave to Discontinue Irregular Service +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KWOK HIN CHEUNG

1st Plaintiff

LO KIN TUNG

2nd Plaintiff

KWOK HIN TAK

1st Defendant

CHONG SAU PUI

2nd Defendant

SAN KWAN

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (high Court) Application for Leave to Discontinue Under Order 21 R 3 / Interlocutory Summons Heard in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to discontinue should be granted under Order 21 r 3
  2. 2 Which party should bear costs on discontinuance and whether the court should depart from the general rule
  3. 3 Whether costs should be allocated between periods before and after 30 March 2006

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to discontinue was granted. Applying the general rule and departing from it for conduct after 30 March 2006, the court ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings up to 30 March 2006 (to be taxed if not agreed); for costs after 30 March 2006 each side must bear their own costs (no order); and the costs of the application for leave to discontinue and of the hearing were awarded to the defendants. The court refused to stay HCMP No. 448 of 2006 pending payment of costs.

Court Disposition

Leave to discontinue granted; costs allocated as ordered below.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs of the proceedings up to 30 March 2006, to be taxed if not agreed.
  • No order as to costs of the proceedings after 30 March 2006 (each side to bear its own costs).