UNION GLORY FINANCE INCAND OTHERS v. MERRILL LYNCH INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD AND ANOTHER

UNION GLORY FINANCE INCAND OTHERS v. MERRILL LYNCH INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD AND ANOTHER

Plaintiffs failed to obtain a judgment better than the sanctioned payment and the sanctioned payment was made at an appropriate stage with sufficient information available; an award of indemnity costs would not be unjust; indemnity costs are ordered from 27 June 2015 (first day after latest date plaintiff could...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
UNION GLORY FINANCE INCAND OTHERS v. MERRILL LYNCH INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: UNION GLORY FINANCE INC; 2nd Plaintiff: DOUBLE SMART FINANCE LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: HANSON FINANCE LIMITED; 4th Plaintiff: CW FINANCING LIMITED (formerly known as WILLIE FINANCING LIMITED); 1st Defendant: MERRILL LYNCH INTERNATIONAL BANK LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: MERRILL LYNCH (ASIA PACIFIC) LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 December 2016
Case Number
HCA2494/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil (misrepresentation/claims in Tort And/or Contract) / Post‑trial Decision on Costs and Interest (costs Judgment)
Outcome
Costs awarded to defendants; indemnity costs and enhanced interest granted in part
Legal Topics
Sanctioned Payment, Calderbank Offer, Indemnity Costs, Interest on Costs, Order 22 Rule 23, Certificate for Two Counsel
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Costs Law Tort (misrepresentation) Contract Sanctioned Payment Calderbank Offer Indemnity Costs Interest on Costs +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UNION GLORY FINANCE INC

1st Plaintiff

DOUBLE SMART FINANCE LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

HANSON FINANCE LIMITED

3rd Plaintiff

CW FINANCING LIMITED (formerly known as WILLIE FINANCING LIMITED)

4th Plaintiff

MERRILL LYNCH INTERNATIONAL BANK LIMITED

1st Defendant

MERRILL LYNCH (ASIA PACIFIC) LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (misrepresentation/claims in Tort And/or Contract) / Post‑trial Decision on Costs and Interest (costs Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded where plaintiffs failed to obtain a judgment better than a sanctioned payment
  2. 2 From what date indemnity costs and interest should run
  3. 3 Whether interest on indemnity costs at 10% above judgment rate is justified

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs failed to obtain a judgment better than the sanctioned payment and the sanctioned payment was made at an appropriate stage with sufficient information available; an award of indemnity costs would not be unjust; indemnity costs are ordered from 27 June 2015 (first day after latest date plaintiff could accept sanctioned payment without leave); interest on indemnity costs should reflect cost of money and, applying a simplified approach in absence of evidence of actual payment dates, interest is awarded at 2.5% above judgment rate from 27 June 2015 until payment; court has jurisdiction under s49(1) to award interest until payment.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to defendants; indemnity costs and enhanced interest granted in part

Orders

  • The plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs on a party and party basis up to and including 26 June 2015
  • The plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs on an indemnity basis from 27 June 2015, with a certificate for two counsel