NINOTRE INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. STRONG LIGHT INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

NINOTRE INVESTMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. STRONG LIGHT INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER

The respondent was not obliged to accept the Petitioners' 2 August offer of a third party guarantee without further information; third party guarantees require the applicant's agreement and, where contested, court approval; accordingly costs are ordered against the Petitioners up to and including 2 August 2019 (with a certificate for counsel) while the costs of the application after 2 August 2019 are to be costs in the cause, with today's hearing costs to be paid by the Petitioners to Flying Mortgage.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2440
Parties
1st Petitioner: Ninotre Investment Limited; 2nd Petitioner: Xiao Qingmin; 1st Respondent: Strong Light Investments Limited; 2nd Respondent: Flying Mortgage Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 September 2019
Case Number
HCCW72/2019
Procedural Posture
Companies Winding Up Proceedings Under Cap 32 / Interim Application/summons for Security for Costs and Consequent Costs Decision
Outcome
Court ordered costs split: Petitioners to pay costs up to and including 2 August 2019 to Flying Mortgage (certificate for counsel); costs after 2 August 2019 are costs in the cause; costs of today's hearing to be paid by the Petitioners to Flying Mortgage.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Third Party Guarantee, Costs in the Cause, Indemnity Costs, Conduct and Costs
Source Language
EN
Company Law Civil Procedure Costs Law Security for Costs Third Party Guarantee Costs in the Cause Indemnity Costs Conduct and Costs

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

Parties

Ninotre Investment Limited

1st Petitioner

Xiao Qingmin

2nd Petitioner

Strong Light Investments Limited

1st Respondent

Flying Mortgage Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Winding Up Proceedings Under Cap 32 / Interim Application/summons for Security for Costs and Consequent Costs Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was obliged to accept an offer of third party guarantee made on 2 August 2019
  2. 2 Whether costs after 2 August 2019 should be ordered against the Petitioners and on what basis (indemnity or costs in the cause)
  3. 3 Appropriate form of security for costs (payment into court v third party guarantee)

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was not obliged to accept the Petitioners' 2 August offer of a third party guarantee without further information; third party guarantees require the applicant's agreement and, where contested, court approval; accordingly costs are ordered against the Petitioners up to and including 2 August 2019 (with a certificate for counsel) while the costs of the application after 2 August 2019 are to be costs in the cause, with today's hearing costs to be paid by the Petitioners to Flying Mortgage.

Court Disposition

Court ordered costs split: Petitioners to pay costs up to and including 2 August 2019 to Flying Mortgage (certificate for counsel); costs after 2 August 2019 are costs in the cause; costs of today's hearing to be paid by the Petitioners to Flying Mortgage.

Orders

  • The Petitioners are to pay Flying Mortgage its costs up to and including 2 August 2019 with a certificate for counsel
  • The costs of the application after 2 August 2019 are costs in the cause