LCC v. LTLA

LCC v. LTLA

Leave to appeal out of time refused because the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success: Practice Direction para 13 expressly permits a judge conducting an FDR hearing to award costs and the costs order was founded on the Respondent's unreasonable conduct (reneging on agreed valuation) rather than on privileged without prejudice communications.

Citation
[2019] HKFC 112
Parties
Petitioner: LTLA; Respondent: Respondent
Court
Family Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 May 2019
Case Number
FCMC10000/2017
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial Causes / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time (paper Disposal)
Outcome
Application dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused; costs order nisi made against Respondent
Legal Topics
First Day Review/financial Dispute Resolution (fdr), Costs Orders, Leave to Appeal Out of Time, Privileged Communications
Source Language
EN
Family Law Civil Procedure Costs Law First Day Review/financial Dispute Resolution (fdr) Costs Orders Leave to Appeal Out of Time Privileged Communications

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

Parties

LTLA

Petitioner

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial Causes / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time (paper Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted under s63A DCO
  2. 2 Whether a judge conducting an FDR hearing has power to make an adverse costs order
  3. 3 Whether the costs order was improperly based on without prejudice/privileged communications

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal out of time refused because the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success: Practice Direction para 13 expressly permits a judge conducting an FDR hearing to award costs and the costs order was founded on the Respondent's unreasonable conduct (reneging on agreed valuation) rather than on privileged without prejudice communications.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused; costs order nisi made against Respondent

Orders

  • Respondent's Summons dated 12 February 2019 dismissed
  • Costs order nisi: Respondent to pay Petitioner costs forthwith, summarily assessed at HK$45,000