LI SIN MAN SELINE and LEE SHU HANG (the executors of the estate of LEE SAI NAM, deceased) v. LI SHU CHUNG AND ANOTHER
The Master erred in issuing interim certificates because she had not actually taxed any part of the bills in the required item-by-item manner; Order 62 r 17(1) authorises interim certificates only for costs that have been taxed (i.e. decided item-by-item), and a taxing master cannot treat unobjected aggregate amounts across partially disputed items as 'taxed'. The appeals are allowed, the interim certificates are set aside and the matter of interim payment is remitted for proper consideration.
- Citation
- [2018] HKCFI 1365
- Parties
- Plaintiff (original Action); 3rd Defendant (counterclaim): Li Sin Man Seline; Plaintiff (original Action); Executor of Estate of Lee Sai Nam: Lee Shu Hang; 1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): Li Shu Chung; 2nd Defendant (original Action): Li Joseph See Sun; 2nd Defendant (counterclaim) (withdrawn): Allied Ever Holdings Ltd; 4th Defendant (counterclaim); Receiving Party on Costs: Yuen Hing Enterprise Macao Commercial Offshore Limited; Original Receiving Party (deceased), Represented by Executors: Lee Sai Nam (deceased)
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 19 June 2018
- Case Number
- HCA1711/2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Costs Taxation and Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Master's Issuance of Interim Certificates (chambers Decision Remitting Part Heard Matters to Master)
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; interim certificates set aside; remittal of part of summons to Master; costs orders made
- Legal Topics
- Interim Certificate, Order 62 R 17(1), Interim Payment on Account, Taxation of Costs, Inherent Jurisdiction, Procedural Fairness
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Li Sin Man Seline
Plaintiff (original Action); 3rd Defendant (counterclaim)
Lee Shu Hang
Plaintiff (original Action); Executor of Estate of Lee Sai Nam
Li Shu Chung
1st Defendant (original Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)
Li Joseph See Sun
2nd Defendant (original Action)
Allied Ever Holdings Ltd
2nd Defendant (counterclaim) (withdrawn)
Yuen Hing Enterprise Macao Commercial Offshore Limited
4th Defendant (counterclaim); Receiving Party on Costs
Lee Sai Nam (deceased)
Original Receiving Party (deceased), Represented by Executors
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs Taxation and Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal Against Master's Issuance of Interim Certificates (chambers Decision Remitting Part Heard Matters to Master)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a taxing master may issue an interim certificate under Order 62 r 17(1) for amounts equal to parts of claimed costs that have not been the subject of item-by-item taxation
- 2 Whether amounts unobjected to in lists of objections across partially disputed items may be treated as 'taxed' for purposes of r 17(1)
- 3 Whether the court should order interim payment under its inherent jurisdiction without evidence from both sides
Ratio Decidendi
The Master erred in issuing interim certificates because she had not actually taxed any part of the bills in the required item-by-item manner; Order 62 r 17(1) authorises interim certificates only for costs that have been taxed (i.e. decided item-by-item), and a taxing master cannot treat unobjected aggregate amounts across partially disputed items as 'taxed'. The appeals are allowed, the interim certificates are set aside and the matter of interim payment is remitted for proper consideration.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; interim certificates set aside; remittal of part of summons to Master; costs orders made
Orders
- Set aside the interim certificates issued by Master K Lo dated 17 January 2017
- Remit paragraph 2 of the 2nd Summons back to the Master for proper consideration
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment