TANG WAI CHUN (鄧惠珍), the administratrix of the estate of MAN CHEUK HEI (文卓熙) also known as MAN CHEUK HI (文卓熙) and MAN CHEUK HI (文灼熙), DECEASED v. MAN KOK WAI AND ANOTHER

TANG WAI CHUN (鄧惠珍), the administratrix of the estate of MAN CHEUK HEI (文卓熙) also known as MAN CHEUK HI (文卓熙) and MAN CHEUK HI (文灼熙), DECEASED v. MAN KOK WAI AND ANOTHER

Where a plaintiff is ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction and is a personal representative, the court may order security for costs because the personal representative is personally liable for costs and the existence or value of an indemnity from the estate is irrelevant to the defendant’s right to enforce costs; no exceptional circumstances justified admitting late valuation evidence; security was ordered in the sum of HK$1.2 million payable within 28 days and costs awarded to the 2nd Defendant.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2058
Parties
Plaintiff (administratrix of the Estate of Man Cheuk Hei, Deceased): Tang Wai Chun (鄧惠珍); 1st Defendant: Man Kok Wai (文國偉); 2nd Defendant: Man Kai Cheong (文啟昌)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 August 2024
Case Number
HCA765/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil — Security for Costs and Costs Dispute / Appeal From Master’s Order; Reasons for Decision by Deputy High Court Judge in Chambers
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part; original order dismissed and security quantum varied
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Personal Representative Liability for Costs, Admission of Further Evidence, Valuation of Estate Assets, Enforcement/partition of Co Owned Land
Source Language
EN

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

Tang Wai Chun (鄧惠珍)

Plaintiff (administratrix of the Estate of Man Cheuk Hei, Deceased)

Man Kok Wai (文國偉)

1st Defendant

Man Kai Cheong (文啟昌)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil — Security for Costs and Costs Dispute / Appeal From Master’s Order; Reasons for Decision by Deputy High Court Judge in Chambers

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against a plaintiff ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction who sues as administratrix
  2. 2 Whether a defendant can enforce a costs order against the personal representative or the estate and whether the value of the estate defeats an order for security
  3. 3 Whether to grant leave to file late additional affirmation evidence (4th affirmation)

Ratio Decidendi

Where a plaintiff is ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction and is a personal representative, the court may order security for costs because the personal representative is personally liable for costs and the existence or value of an indemnity from the estate is irrelevant to the defendant’s right to enforce costs; no exceptional circumstances justified admitting late valuation evidence; security was ordered in the sum of HK$1.2 million payable within 28 days and costs awarded to the 2nd Defendant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in part; original order dismissed and security quantum varied

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed against the Master’s order dismissing the Summons and ordering security for costs
  • Summons dated 2 April 2024 for leave to file the 4th affirmation dismissed