KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. HAU WUN FAI AND OTHERS

KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. HAU WUN FAI AND OTHERS

The judge refused the plaintiffs' variation, held that alleged misrepresentation did not affect the costs outcome, allowed the Solicitors' application for variation and ordered that all costs be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed, and ordered the plaintiffs to bear the costs of the variation likewise to be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed.

Citation
KAN WAI CHUNG AND OTHERS v. HAU WUN FAI AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Kan Wai Chung; 2nd Plaintiff: Kan Kar Fai; 3rd Plaintiff: Kan Wai Ming; 4th Plaintiff: Lau Fook Keung; 5th Plaintiff: Kan For Ping Steven; 1st Defendant: Hau Wun Fai; 2nd Defendant: Li Siu Fung; 3rd Defendant: Yeung Wai Hung Peter; 4th Defendant: Lee Kwok Yung
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 March 2012
Case Number
HCA811/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs (high Court Action No 811 of 2010) / Decision on Costs (post Judgment, Variation of Order Nisi)
Outcome
Variation of the costs order nisi partly granted in favour of the Solicitors; plaintiffs' variation refused.
Legal Topics
Indemnity Costs, Variation of Costs Order Nisi, Strike Out, Default Judgment, Vexatious Proceedings
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Solicitors' Professional Conduct Appeal Indemnity Costs Variation of Costs Order Nisi Strike Out Default Judgment +1 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kan Wai Chung

1st Plaintiff

Kan Kar Fai

2nd Plaintiff

Kan Wai Ming

3rd Plaintiff

Lau Fook Keung

4th Plaintiff

Kan For Ping Steven

5th Plaintiff

Hau Wun Fai

1st Defendant

Li Siu Fung

2nd Defendant

Yeung Wai Hung Peter

3rd Defendant

Lee Kwok Yung

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs (high Court Action No 811 of 2010) / Decision on Costs (post Judgment, Variation of Order Nisi)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs (the Tings) could resist costs of the appeal on basis of alleged solicitor misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the costs order of the master should remain following successful appeal
  3. 3 Whether indemnity costs are appropriate given the plaintiffs' conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The judge refused the plaintiffs' variation, held that alleged misrepresentation did not affect the costs outcome, allowed the Solicitors' application for variation and ordered that all costs be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed, and ordered the plaintiffs to bear the costs of the variation likewise to be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Variation of the costs order nisi partly granted in favour of the Solicitors; plaintiffs' variation refused.

Orders

  • All costs of the action, including costs of the appeal, setting aside application and costs before the master, are to be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed.
  • The costs of the application to vary are to be borne by the plaintiffs and are likewise to be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed.