JACALYN E.S. BENNETT & CO v. KASHO SAMNONG LTD AND ANOTHER

JACALYN E.S. BENNETT & CO v. KASHO SAMNONG LTD AND ANOTHER

The plaintiff's pleaded case was so deficient that the Order 14 application was unjustified; accordingly the plaintiff must pay the first defendant's costs below, the second defendant's costs are to be in the cause, the indemnity (special) costs order was not allowed to stand because it was obtained on a false or erroneous claim, and the defendants recover their costs of the appeal and of the costs hearing; immediate taxation and recovery was refused absent special circumstances.

Citation
JACALYN E.S. BENNETT & CO v. KASHO SAMNONG LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: JACALYN E.S. BENNETT & CO.; First Defendant: KASHO & SAMNONG LIMITED; Second Defendant: LIM YING YING LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 June 1997
Case Number
HCA6883/1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment (order 14) / Judgment on Costs Following Appeal (post Appeal Costs Hearing)
Outcome
Plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs in specified respects; special indemnity costs order disallowed; defendants' costs of appeal and of the costs hearing awarded; immediate taxation/referral for recovery refused.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Order 14, Indemnity Costs, Costs in the Cause, Pleading Sufficiency, Duty to Account
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Appeal Agency/accounting Summary Judgment Order 14 Indemnity Costs Costs in the Cause +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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JACALYN E.S. BENNETT & CO.

Plaintiff

KASHO & SAMNONG LIMITED

First Defendant

LIM YING YING LIMITED

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Master's Summary Judgment (order 14) / Judgment on Costs Following Appeal (post Appeal Costs Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should retain costs awarded by the Master
  2. 2 Whether the special indemnity costs order should stand
  3. 3 Whether costs below should follow the event or be in the cause

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's pleaded case was so deficient that the Order 14 application was unjustified; accordingly the plaintiff must pay the first defendant's costs below, the second defendant's costs are to be in the cause, the indemnity (special) costs order was not allowed to stand because it was obtained on a false or erroneous claim, and the defendants recover their costs of the appeal and of the costs hearing; immediate taxation and recovery was refused absent special circumstances.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs in specified respects; special indemnity costs order disallowed; defendants' costs of appeal and of the costs hearing awarded; immediate taxation/referral for recovery refused.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs of the proceedings before the Master
  • Costs in relation to the application against the second defendant to be in the cause