柯開榮 對 明泰建築工程有限公司

柯開榮 對 明泰建築工程有限公司

Leave to appeal was refused; the interim costs order previously made requiring the plaintiff to pay the defendant HKD50,000 stands; the plaintiff's subsequent application to vary the costs order and for interim payment was refused because he had not obtained leave and the defendant filed no submissions, so no costs...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCA 615
Parties
Plaintiff: KE KAI JUNG (柯開榮); Defendant: MING TAI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (明泰建築工程有限公司)
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 July 2025
Case Number
CAMP204/2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Subsequent Interlocutory Application to Vary Costs Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; application to vary costs refused; interim costs order requiring plaintiff to pay defendant HKD50,000 affirmed; no costs order made for the subsequent 18 June application.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Interim Costs Order, Variation of Costs Order, Costs Follow the Event
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Appeal Leave to Appeal Interim Costs Order Variation of Costs Order Costs Follow the Event

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KE KAI JUNG (柯開榮)

Plaintiff

MING TAI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED (明泰建築工程有限公司)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal and Subsequent Interlocutory Application to Vary Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the costs order requiring the plaintiff to pay the defendant HKD50,000 should be varied
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interim payment from the defendant or variation of costs in light of his personal circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused; the interim costs order previously made requiring the plaintiff to pay the defendant HKD50,000 stands; the plaintiff's subsequent application to vary the costs order and for interim payment was refused because he had not obtained leave and the defendant filed no submissions, so no costs order was made in respect of that application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; application to vary costs refused; interim costs order requiring plaintiff to pay defendant HKD50,000 affirmed; no costs order made for the subsequent 18 June application.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • Interim costs order requiring the plaintiff to pay the defendant HKD50,000