LEHNER EWALD STEPHAN v. PUI TSAN PO AND OTHERS

LEHNER EWALD STEPHAN v. PUI TSAN PO AND OTHERS

The plain language of Order 62 rule 3(12) means the person against whom the order is sought (the respondent to the application) is entitled, unless the court otherwise directs, to costs of and incidental to the application and of complying with any order made thereon; no special circumstances were found to displace that entitlement, so the original costs order nisi was varied to require the plaintiff to pay those costs, while the costs of the summons hearing itself were ordered as no order.

Citation
LEHNER EWALD STEPHAN v. PUI TSAN PO AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Lehner Ewald Stephan; 1st Defendant: Pui Tsan Po; 2nd Defendant: Wong Ming Tung; 3rd Defendant: Pui Tai Betty
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 December 2016
Case Number
DCMP1310/2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings / Post Judgment Costs Variation Application (summons Hearing)
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied: plaintiff to pay defendants costs of and incidental to the application and of complying with the order; no order as to costs of the summons hearing.
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Order 62 Rule 3(12), Sections 47 A/47 B/47 D District Court Ordinance, Variation of Costs Order Nisi
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Pre Action Discovery District Court Rules Costs Orders Order 62 Rule 3(12) Sections 47 A/47 B/47 D District Court Ordinance Variation of Costs Order Nisi

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lehner Ewald Stephan

Plaintiff

Pui Tsan Po

1st Defendant

Wong Ming Tung

2nd Defendant

Pui Tai Betty

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings / Post Judgment Costs Variation Application (summons Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the person against whom an order is sought under Order 62 rule 3(12) is entitled to costs
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to displace the presumptive costs entitlement under Order 62 rule 3(12)
  3. 3 Proper costs order following variation of a costs order nisi

Ratio Decidendi

The plain language of Order 62 rule 3(12) means the person against whom the order is sought (the respondent to the application) is entitled, unless the court otherwise directs, to costs of and incidental to the application and of complying with any order made thereon; no special circumstances were found to displace that entitlement, so the original costs order nisi was varied to require the plaintiff to pay those costs, while the costs of the summons hearing itself were ordered as no order.

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied: plaintiff to pay defendants costs of and incidental to the application and of complying with the order; no order as to costs of the summons hearing.

Orders

  • Vary costs order nisi: plaintiff shall pay the defendants the costs of and incidental to the application and of complying with the order.
  • No order as to costs of this summons.