MAYSUN ENGINEERING CO LTD v. WORMALD ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD

MAYSUN ENGINEERING CO LTD v. WORMALD ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD

The court allowed correction of the accidental date slip in paragraph 66 to 15 April 2003; refused to disallow interest on the judgment sum because variation of the interest order post-judgment was not appropriate under Order 20 Rule 11 and the defendant had the use of the funds until payment-in and failed to include interest when paying in; however, after evaluating parties' conduct the court exercised its costs discretion to vary the order nisi and ordered the defendant to pay 70% of the plaintiff's costs and ordered the plaintiff to pay costs of the application to the defendant.

Citation
MAYSUN ENGINEERING CO LTD v. WORMALD ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: MAYSUN ENGINEERING CO. LTD.; Defendant: WORMALD ENGINEERING SERVICES LIMITED
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 May 2006
Case Number
DCCJ2885/2003
Procedural Posture
District Court Civil Action / Post Judgment Application to Vary/amend Judgment Under Order 20 Rule 11 and Order 42 Rule 5 B
Outcome
Application partly granted in that the date in paragraph 66 was amended; application to disallow interest refused; costs order in the original judgment varied so defendant pays 70% of plaintiff's costs; plaintiff to pay costs of the application to defendant.
Legal Topics
Variation of Judgment, Payment Into Court, Interest on Judgment, Costs Allocation, Accidental Slip Correction
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Contract Commercial Litigation Judgment Enforcement Variation of Judgment Payment Into Court Interest on Judgment +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MAYSUN ENGINEERING CO. LTD.

Plaintiff

WORMALD ENGINEERING SERVICES LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

District Court Civil Action / Post Judgment Application to Vary/amend Judgment Under Order 20 Rule 11 and Order 42 Rule 5 B

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 66 contains an accidental slip requiring correction
  2. 2 Whether interest on the judgment sum should be disallowed because plaintiff refused tendered payment
  3. 3 Whether the costs order should be varied in light of parties' conduct and payment into court rules

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed correction of the accidental date slip in paragraph 66 to 15 April 2003; refused to disallow interest on the judgment sum because variation of the interest order post-judgment was not appropriate under Order 20 Rule 11 and the defendant had the use of the funds until payment-in and failed to include interest when paying in; however, after evaluating parties' conduct the court exercised its costs discretion to vary the order nisi and ordered the defendant to pay 70% of the plaintiff's costs and ordered the plaintiff to pay costs of the application to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Application partly granted in that the date in paragraph 66 was amended; application to disallow interest refused; costs order in the original judgment varied so defendant pays 70% of plaintiff's costs; plaintiff to pay costs of the application to defendant.

Orders

  • Amend paragraph 66 of the Judgment to read 15 April 2003 in place of 24 December 2002.
  • Refuse the defendant's application to disallow interest on the judgment sum of HK$214,278.51.