GALCO INTERNATIONAL TOYS N.V. v. KADER INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD.

GALCO INTERNATIONAL TOYS N.V. v. KADER INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD.

Because Kader had itself been tardy in serving particulars and Galco served its particulars and supplemental discovery within a reasonable period thereafter, it was not just to order Kader to pay the costs nor to penalise Galco; the appropriate disposition was to order costs to be in the cause and make no further immediate orders on the summons.

Citation
GALCO INTERNATIONAL TOYS N.V. v. KADER INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD.
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant (consolidated Actions): Galco International Toys N.V.; Plaintiff/defendant (consolidated Actions): Kader Industrial Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 May 1995
Case Number
HCA250/1991
Procedural Posture
Civil Consolidated Actions / Interlocutory Summons and Review Before Trial; Trial Adjourned Sine Die
Outcome
Application not granted in the sense of ordering costs against either party; costs ordered 'in the cause'; no further immediate interlocutory orders made
Legal Topics
Further and Better Particulars, Unless Order, Supplemental Discovery, Costs in the Cause, Case Management/trial Listing
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Discovery Costs Further and Better Particulars Unless Order Supplemental Discovery Costs in the Cause Case Management/trial Listing

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Galco International Toys N.V.

Plaintiff/defendant (consolidated Actions)

Kader Industrial Company Limited

Plaintiff/defendant (consolidated Actions)

Procedural Posture

Civil Consolidated Actions / Interlocutory Summons and Review Before Trial; Trial Adjourned Sine Die

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unless order should result in sanctions or costs against the defaulting party
  2. 2 Whether Galco was unreasonable or tardy in serving particulars and discovery
  3. 3 Appropriate allocation of costs for interlocutory applications

Ratio Decidendi

Because Kader had itself been tardy in serving particulars and Galco served its particulars and supplemental discovery within a reasonable period thereafter, it was not just to order Kader to pay the costs nor to penalise Galco; the appropriate disposition was to order costs to be in the cause and make no further immediate orders on the summons.

Court Disposition

Application not granted in the sense of ordering costs against either party; costs ordered 'in the cause'; no further immediate interlocutory orders made

Orders

  • Costs of the summons to be in the cause
  • Costs of the review and any additional costs incurred thereby to be in the cause