DESIR, ANTHONY C v. KNIGHT FRANK (SERVICES) LTD AND OTHERS

DESIR, ANTHONY C v. KNIGHT FRANK (SERVICES) LTD AND OTHERS

The court held that the appellant was entitled to costs of the proceedings below and of the appeal; the IO's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed because the failed grounds were not so unreasonable as to justify depriving costs, the appellant lacked sufficient evidence to recover the claimed time rates and excessive disbursements but was entitled to a reasonable award for costs below. The court ordered IO to pay $4,000 for Costs Below, made the Costs Order Nisi absolute and ordered IO to pay appellant's costs of the appeal to be taxed if not agreed.

Citation
DESIR, ANTHONY C v. KNIGHT FRANK (SERVICES) LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Claimant/appellant: DESIR, ANTHONY C; 1st Defendant (discontinued): KNIGHT FRANK (SERVICES) LIMITED; 2nd Defendant (discontinued): JOHN CHAN; 3rd Defendant/respondent: THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF Y Y MANSION
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 April 2015
Case Number
HCSA36/2013
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Tribunal Appeal (on Appeal From SCTC No 31038 of 2012) / Decision on Costs (paper Disposal)
Outcome
IO's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi dismissed; Costs Order Nisi made absolute; IO ordered to pay costs to appellant with specific award for costs below.
Legal Topics
Section 24 Costs, Variation of Costs Order, Taxation of Costs, Proportionality in Costs, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
EN
Civil Litigation Costs Procedural Law Property Law Tribunal Practice Section 24 Costs Variation of Costs Order Taxation of Costs +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DESIR, ANTHONY C

Claimant/appellant

KNIGHT FRANK (SERVICES) LIMITED

1st Defendant (discontinued)

JOHN CHAN

2nd Defendant (discontinued)

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF Y Y MANSION

3rd Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Tribunal Appeal (on Appeal From SCTC No 31038 of 2012) / Decision on Costs (paper Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant is entitled to costs of the proceedings below under section 24 of the Ordinance
  2. 2 Quantification of costs recoverable by a litigant in person (time costs, travel, disbursements) in Small Claims Tribunal proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the Costs Order Nisi should be varied to deprive appellant of part of his costs given failed grounds of appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellant was entitled to costs of the proceedings below and of the appeal; the IO's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed because the failed grounds were not so unreasonable as to justify depriving costs, the appellant lacked sufficient evidence to recover the claimed time rates and excessive disbursements but was entitled to a reasonable award for costs below. The court ordered IO to pay $4,000 for Costs Below, made the Costs Order Nisi absolute and ordered IO to pay appellant's costs of the appeal to be taxed if not agreed.

Court Disposition

IO's application to vary the Costs Order Nisi dismissed; Costs Order Nisi made absolute; IO ordered to pay costs to appellant with specific award for costs below.

Orders

  • IO to pay appellant $4,000 for costs of the proceedings in SCTC31038/2012 (Costs Below)
  • Costs Order Nisi made absolute: IO to pay appellant costs of the Appeal (including all costs reserved) to be taxed if not agreed