TIN WAN TUNG v. WONG SEE YIN AND OTHERS

TIN WAN TUNG v. WONG SEE YIN AND OTHERS

Defendants failed to demonstrate substantial grounds under Order 62 r 9C(1)(a) to prevent summary assessment; the claimed costs did not appear disproportionate; applying the global approach the court summarily assessed and reduced the solicitors' claim and fixed counsel's fee, and varied the costs order nisi to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TIN WAN TUNG v. WONG SEE YIN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: FULL PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; Plaintiff: Plaintiff in HCA 167/2011; 1st Defendant: WONG SEE YIN; 3rd Defendant: FULLY FORTUNE (ASIA) LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 June 2017
Case Number
HCA167/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Assessment / Taxation Appeal / Decision on Costs Following Taxation Appeal and Stay Summons
Outcome
Application to vary the costs order nisi allowed; summary assessment on an indemnity basis made; order for defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs within 14 days
Legal Topics
Summary Assessment of Costs, Indemnity Costs, Costs Nisi, Civil Justice Reform, Taxation Appeal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Costs Appeal Summary Assessment of Costs Indemnity Costs Costs Nisi Civil Justice Reform Taxation Appeal

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FULL PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

Plaintiff

Plaintiff in HCA 167/2011

Plaintiff

WONG SEE YIN

1st Defendant

FULLY FORTUNE (ASIA) LIMITED

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs Assessment / Taxation Appeal / Decision on Costs Following Taxation Appeal and Stay Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied to permit summary assessment on an indemnity basis
  2. 2 Whether the defendants demonstrated substantial grounds to dispute the sum claimed so as to require a full taxation under Order 62 rule 9C(1)(a)
  3. 3 Whether the sums claimed were disproportionate and whether each item was reasonably or necessarily incurred

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to demonstrate substantial grounds under Order 62 r 9C(1)(a) to prevent summary assessment; the claimed costs did not appear disproportionate; applying the global approach the court summarily assessed and reduced the solicitors' claim and fixed counsel's fee, and varied the costs order nisi to require defendants to pay on an indemnity basis within 14 days.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the costs order nisi allowed; summary assessment on an indemnity basis made; order for defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs within 14 days

Orders

  • The defendants do pay the plaintiffs' costs of the Taxation Appeal and the Stay Summons on an indemnity basis within 14 days from the date hereof, as summarily assessed below.
  • In respect of HCA 167/2011: counsel's fee assessed at HK$196000 and plaintiff's solicitors' costs assessed at HK$66950.