RE PORTER III AUSTIN MC CAULLEY

RE PORTER III AUSTIN MC CAULLEY

Because the Petitioner ultimately produced the requisitions and the Debtors were therefore the effective winners on the Inspection Summonses, the Debtors are entitled to party-and-party costs for those summonses; conversely the Unless Order Summonses were unnecessary and duplicative and thus the Petitioner must pay indemnity costs for those summonses.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 3044
Parties
Petitioner / Creditor: ORIX ASIA LIMITED; Debtor: Porter Martine Joan; Debtor: Porter III Austin Mc Caulley
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 December 2020
Case Number
HCB2758/2019
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Proceedings / Decision on Costs (interlocutory)
Outcome
Costs orders made: Debtors awarded party-and-party costs for Inspection Summonses; Petitioner ordered to pay indemnity costs for the Unless Order Summonses; taxation if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Inspection of Documents, Order for Production, Unless Order, Interlocutory Summonses, Costs Follow the Event, O.24 Rr.10 13
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Bankruptcy / Insolvency Costs Law Evidence / Disclosure Inspection of Documents Order for Production Unless Order Interlocutory Summonses +2 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ORIX ASIA LIMITED

Petitioner / Creditor

Porter Martine Joan

Debtor

Porter III Austin Mc Caulley

Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Proceedings / Decision on Costs (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Debtors were entitled to production/inspection of court requisitions under O.24 rr.10 and 11A
  2. 2 Whether the order sought under O.24 r.13 (necessity for fair disposal or saving costs) was met
  3. 3 Proper costs consequences where documents were ultimately produced

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Petitioner ultimately produced the requisitions and the Debtors were therefore the effective winners on the Inspection Summonses, the Debtors are entitled to party-and-party costs for those summonses; conversely the Unless Order Summonses were unnecessary and duplicative and thus the Petitioner must pay indemnity costs for those summonses.

Court Disposition

Costs orders made: Debtors awarded party-and-party costs for Inspection Summonses; Petitioner ordered to pay indemnity costs for the Unless Order Summonses; taxation if not agreed.

Orders

  • Debtors entitled to costs of and occasioned by the Inspection Summonses on a party to party basis, to be taxed if not agreed.
  • Petitioner entitled to costs of and occasioned by the Unless Order Summonses on an indemnity basis, to be taxed if not agreed.