LAU TAK LUN AND ANOTHER v. HO KA YAN

LAU TAK LUN AND ANOTHER v. HO KA YAN

Adopting Harbour Hero, the court held the defendant's merits were disclosed by the defendant's first affirmation dated 26 February 2025, therefore the plaintiffs recover costs incurred up to that date (including perusal); costs of resisting the setting aside application thereafter, including the 7 July 2025 hearing, are to be borne by the plaintiffs.

Citation
[2025] HKDC 1529
Parties
1st Plaintiff: LAU TAK LUN; 2nd Plaintiff: TSE SUK HANG; Defendant: HO KA YAN
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 September 2025
Case Number
DCCJ7604/2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied as specified
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Costs Order Nisi, Variation of Costs Order, Perusal Costs, Real Prospect of Success
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Judgment Setting Aside Default Judgment Costs Order Nisi Variation of Costs Order Perusal Costs Real Prospect of Success

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAU TAK LUN

1st Plaintiff

TSE SUK HANG

2nd Plaintiff

HO KA YAN

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to costs because the judgment set aside was a regular judgment
  3. 3 What date discloses the defendant's merits for costs purposes

Ratio Decidendi

Adopting Harbour Hero, the court held the defendant's merits were disclosed by the defendant's first affirmation dated 26 February 2025, therefore the plaintiffs recover costs incurred up to that date (including perusal); costs of resisting the setting aside application thereafter, including the 7 July 2025 hearing, are to be borne by the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied as specified

Orders

  • The costs order nisi is varied: the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs are to have their costs incurred up to 26 February 2025 (including costs of perusal).
  • The costs for resisting the setting aside application, including the hearing dated 7 July 2025, are to be borne by the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs.