LAM MABLE v. WORLD PLACE LTD AND OTHERS

LAM MABLE v. WORLD PLACE LTD AND OTHERS

The court held that although the defendants' opposition was not frivolous, the grounds were devoid of merit and, consistent with CJR practice, varied the costs order nisi so that the defendants must pay the costs occasioned by their opposition and the reserved costs; such costs are to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith; a bill of costs must be filed within 7 days and defendants may file objections within 7 days thereafter.

Citation
LAM MABLE v. WORLD PLACE LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: LAM MABLE; 1st Defendant: WORLD PLACE LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: FREI ALFRED; 3rd Defendant: KWOK TSUI KING CHRISTINE
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 April 2012
Case Number
HCA4699/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Decision on Costs
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied in favour of the plaintiff; defendants ordered to pay specified costs and those costs to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith; procedural timetable for summary assessment imposed.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Statement of Claim, Costs Order Nisi, Summary Assessment of Costs, Opposition to Interlocutory Application, Immediate Taxation of Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Interlocutory Relief Amendment of Statement of Claim Costs Order Nisi Summary Assessment of Costs Opposition to Interlocutory Application Immediate Taxation of Costs

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAM MABLE

Plaintiff

WORLD PLACE LIMITED

1st Defendant

FREI ALFRED

2nd Defendant

KWOK TSUI KING CHRISTINE

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application to Amend Statement of Claim / Decision on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants should pay the plaintiff's costs of the defendants' opposition to the amendment application
  2. 2 Whether those costs should be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' opposition was frivolous or had merit

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that although the defendants' opposition was not frivolous, the grounds were devoid of merit and, consistent with CJR practice, varied the costs order nisi so that the defendants must pay the costs occasioned by their opposition and the reserved costs; such costs are to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith; a bill of costs must be filed within 7 days and defendants may file objections within 7 days thereafter.

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied in favour of the plaintiff; defendants ordered to pay specified costs and those costs to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith; procedural timetable for summary assessment imposed.

Orders

  • Costs occasioned by the defendants' opposition to the plaintiff's application to amend and the costs reserved in the application to be paid by the defendants
  • Those costs are to be taxed if not agreed and paid forthwith