HO KIN PONG AND ANOTHER v. TAM KOK HUNG AND ANOTHER

HO KIN PONG AND ANOTHER v. TAM KOK HUNG AND ANOTHER

The sanctioned offer, despite minor formal defect, was effective; defendants had sufficient information (including plaintiffs' expert report served months earlier) and failed to take available steps to protect their position or seek clarifications; it was not unjust to apply Order 22 r.24. Accordingly plaintiffs were entitled to enhanced interest of 4% above judgment rate on the judgment sum from 20 August 2010 and indemnity costs with interest at 2% above judgment rate from the same date; defendants to pay costs of the application on an indemnity basis.

Citation
HO KIN PONG AND ANOTHER v. TAM KOK HUNG AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: HO KIN PONG; 2nd Plaintiff: LO YIN; 1st Defendant: TAM KOK HUNG; 2nd Defendant: MAK WAI MAN; Third Party: WONG WING
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 June 2011
Case Number
DCCJ624/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Damages Arising From Failed Property Sale / Post‑judgment Application Under Order 22 R.24 for Enhanced Interest and Indemnity Costs
Outcome
Plaintiffs' application allowed; orders for enhanced interest and indemnity costs made in favour of plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Sanctioned Offer, Enhanced Interest, Indemnity Costs, Interest on Costs, Third Party Proceedings, Valuation Dispute
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Property Law Contract Interest Sanctioned Offer Enhanced Interest Indemnity Costs +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HO KIN PONG

1st Plaintiff

LO YIN

2nd Plaintiff

TAM KOK HUNG

1st Defendant

MAK WAI MAN

2nd Defendant

WONG WING

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Damages Arising From Failed Property Sale / Post‑judgment Application Under Order 22 R.24 for Enhanced Interest and Indemnity Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' sanctioned offer entitled them to enhanced interest and indemnity costs under Order 22 r.24
  2. 2 Whether the sanctioned offer complied with formal requirements of Order 22 r.5 or whether defects should be waived
  3. 3 Whether it would be unjust to make orders under Order 22 r.24 having regard to the parties' conduct and information available

Ratio Decidendi

The sanctioned offer, despite minor formal defect, was effective; defendants had sufficient information (including plaintiffs' expert report served months earlier) and failed to take available steps to protect their position or seek clarifications; it was not unjust to apply Order 22 r.24. Accordingly plaintiffs were entitled to enhanced interest of 4% above judgment rate on the judgment sum from 20 August 2010 and indemnity costs with interest at 2% above judgment rate from the same date; defendants to pay costs of the application on an indemnity basis.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' application allowed; orders for enhanced interest and indemnity costs made in favour of plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Enhanced interest on the judgment sum of $346,677 at 4% above judgment rate from 20 August 2010 until payment
  • Indemnity costs awarded to the plaintiffs from 20 August 2010