FUNG TIN YAU (IN HIS OWN CAPACITY AND SUING AS A SHAREHOLDER OF MAXFORTUNE TRADING LTD AND ON BEHALF OF MAXFORTUNE TRADING LTD AS SHAREHOLDER OF SAMDOR CO LTD) v. FUNG TIN SHING AND OTHERS

FUNG TIN YAU (IN HIS OWN CAPACITY AND SUING AS A SHAREHOLDER OF MAXFORTUNE TRADING LTD AND ON BEHALF OF MAXFORTUNE TRADING LTD AS SHAREHOLDER OF SAMDOR CO LTD) v. FUNG TIN SHING AND OTHERS

The court varied the costs orders nisi: it treated the three sets of appeals as de novo justifying allowed preparation; it summarily assessed the Total Appeal Costs at HK$700,000 (reduced from the claimed HK$816,171.90), taxed down the 2‑counsel brief for the 11 January 2019 Directions Hearing to HK$50,000, ordered...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1051
Parties
Petitioner: Fung Tin Yau; Respondent: Fung Tin Shing; Respondent: Fung Wing See; Respondent: Lai Ng Nui; Respondent: Fung Wing Yan; Respondent: Fung Wing Yin; Respondent: Great Anchor International Limited; Respondent: Maxfortune Trading Limited; Respondent: Premium Management Limited; Respondent: Wyse Investment Limited; Respondent: Samdor Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 June 2020
Case Number
HCA2078/2017
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up) Proceedings; Consolidated Appeals and Related Summonses / Costs Decision and Summary Assessment Following Appeal and Directions Hearings
Outcome
Costs orders nisi varied as to quantum and allocation: Total Appeal Costs summarily assessed; Direction Summons costs placed in the cause; Costs Summons summarily assessed.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Summary Assessment of Costs, Directions Summons, Apportionment of Costs, Appeals From Masters
Source Language
en
Company Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Costs Orders Summary Assessment of Costs Directions Summons Apportionment of Costs Appeals From Masters

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fung Tin Yau

Petitioner

Fung Tin Shing

Respondent

Fung Wing See

Respondent

Lai Ng Nui

Respondent

Fung Wing Yan

Respondent

Fung Wing Yin

Respondent

Great Anchor International Limited

Respondent

Maxfortune Trading Limited

Respondent

Premium Management Limited

Respondent

Wyse Investment Limited

Respondent

Samdor Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up) Proceedings; Consolidated Appeals and Related Summonses / Costs Decision and Summary Assessment Following Appeal and Directions Hearings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs orders nisi should be varied to include reserved costs of the Directions Hearing
  2. 2 Quantum of costs for the 3 sets of appeals and proper allowance for professional time and counsel fees
  3. 3 Whether costs of the Direction Summons should be in the cause

Ratio Decidendi

The court varied the costs orders nisi: it treated the three sets of appeals as de novo justifying allowed preparation; it summarily assessed the Total Appeal Costs at HK$700,000 (reduced from the claimed HK$816,171.90), taxed down the 2‑counsel brief for the 11 January 2019 Directions Hearing to HK$50,000, ordered costs of the Direction Summons to be in the cause, and summarily assessed the Costs Summons at HK$5,000 to be set off against the Petitioner’s appeal costs.

Court Disposition

Costs orders nisi varied as to quantum and allocation: Total Appeal Costs summarily assessed; Direction Summons costs placed in the cause; Costs Summons summarily assessed.

Orders

  • Petitioner to have the costs of all three sets of appeals including reserved costs for the Directions Hearing of 11 January 2019, to be summarily assessed
  • Appeal costs in respect of HCA 2078 Strike Out Summons to be borne by Madam Lai and Jenny