TAI DA TRADING (HK) CO LTD v. CHAN WAI KUEN

TAI DA TRADING (HK) CO LTD v. CHAN WAI KUEN

Given the brief one‑day delay, the prior notice to the plaintiff, and lack of prejudice, the court exercised its discretion to extend time. On the merits the court found the defendant's and third party's main arguments did not prevail and that there were arguable issues requiring trial; therefore the Costs Order Nisi previously made (costs of the appeal to be defendant's and HN's costs in the cause, taxed if not agreed) was fair and was made absolute. The court ordered each of the defendant and HN to pay the plaintiff's costs of their respective costs summonses in any event, taxed if not agreed.

Citation
TAI DA TRADING (HK) CO LTD v. CHAN WAI KUEN
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant; Third Party: HOOSENALLY & NEO, SOLICITORS (a firm)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 June 2013
Case Number
HCA812/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Costs Order Nisi made absolute; extension of time granted for one‑day late applications; defendant and third party ordered to pay plaintiff's costs of their respective costs summonses; costs of the appeal to remain costs in the cause to be taxed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Variation of Costs Order, Costs Nisi, Extension of Time, Specific Performance, Waiver, Trial Issues
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Contract Costs Summary Judgment Variation of Costs Order Costs Nisi Extension of Time Specific Performance +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

HOOSENALLY & NEO, SOLICITORS (a firm)

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Costs Determination After Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend time for applications to vary a costs order nisi given a one‑day delay
  2. 2 Whether the costs order nisi should be varied to require immediate payment of the successful parties' costs of the appeal
  3. 3 Whether costs of the appeal should follow the event or remain costs in the cause

Ratio Decidendi

Given the brief one‑day delay, the prior notice to the plaintiff, and lack of prejudice, the court exercised its discretion to extend time. On the merits the court found the defendant's and third party's main arguments did not prevail and that there were arguable issues requiring trial; therefore the Costs Order Nisi previously made (costs of the appeal to be defendant's and HN's costs in the cause, taxed if not agreed) was fair and was made absolute. The court ordered each of the defendant and HN to pay the plaintiff's costs of their respective costs summonses in any event, taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

Costs Order Nisi made absolute; extension of time granted for one‑day late applications; defendant and third party ordered to pay plaintiff's costs of their respective costs summonses; costs of the appeal to remain costs in the cause to be taxed if not agreed.

Orders

  • Costs Order Nisi is made absolute.
  • Extension of time granted to the defendant and HN for their Costs Summonses despite one‑day delay.