WONG LAN AND ANOTHER v. HONG CHANG CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CO AND ANOTHER

WONG LAN AND ANOTHER v. HONG CHANG CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CO AND ANOTHER

Court rejected automatic entitlement under Wellegant but accepted entitlement under the Lai Ki principle; adopted an issue‑based apportionment, holding Wellegant reliance was not unreasonable so there would be no order as to costs on that issue, and awarded plaintiffs 2/5 of the costs for the application to reflect time apportionment and overall success.

Citation
WONG LAN AND ANOTHER v. HONG CHANG CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CO AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiffs: WONG LAN and CHEUNG SO KUEN (personal representatives of PANG KAR PING, deceased); Defendant: HONG CHANG CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CO. LTD.; Defendant: HOP LEE BUILDERS CO. LTD.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 June 2007
Case Number
HCPI973/2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action (costs Application Following Settlement) / Post‑settlement Costs Taxation / Interlocutory Costs Application
Outcome
Defendant ordered to pay 2/5 of the costs to the plaintiffs for the application; no order as to costs on the Wellegant argument; plaintiffs' own costs to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.
Legal Topics
Scale of Costs, Acceptance of Payment in, District Court Jurisdiction, Apportionment of Costs, Reliance on Authority, Lai Ki Principle, No Order as to Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Personal Injury Infant Settlement Scale of Costs Acceptance of Payment in District Court Jurisdiction Apportionment of Costs +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG LAN and CHEUNG SO KUEN (personal representatives of PANG KAR PING, deceased)

Plaintiffs

HONG CHANG CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CO. LTD.

Defendant

HOP LEE BUILDERS CO. LTD.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action (costs Application Following Settlement) / Post‑settlement Costs Taxation / Interlocutory Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether acceptance of payment in under O.22 r.3(1) automatically entitles claimant to costs taxed on High Court scale under O.62 r.10(2) (Wellegant issue)
  2. 2 Whether claimant was entitled to High Court scale costs because there was a reasonable prospect of recovery above District Court jurisdiction when writ issued (Lai Ki issue)
  3. 3 Whether costs should be apportioned between discrete issues and whether no order as to costs should apply to the Wellegant issue

Ratio Decidendi

Court rejected automatic entitlement under Wellegant but accepted entitlement under the Lai Ki principle; adopted an issue‑based apportionment, holding Wellegant reliance was not unreasonable so there would be no order as to costs on that issue, and awarded plaintiffs 2/5 of the costs for the application to reflect time apportionment and overall success.

Court Disposition

Defendant ordered to pay 2/5 of the costs to the plaintiffs for the application; no order as to costs on the Wellegant argument; plaintiffs' own costs to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay 2/5 of the costs to the plaintiffs for the application on 7 May 2007.
  • No order as to costs in respect of the Wellegant argument.