LIM YEW CHENG (suing in a personal capacity and derivatively on behalf of himself as a shareholder of KENORA CORPORATION LTD) AND OTHERS v. COSIMO BORRELLI AND OTHERS
The Master did not err and his costs order was reasonable: Plaintiffs failed to negotiate adequate security and ignored a reasonable offer, thereby justifying the award of costs to Defendants; the appeal\u2019s costs are awarded to Defendants and to be taxed if not agreed.
- Citation
- [2025] HKCFI 2085
- Parties
- 1st Plaintiff (personal and Derivative Claimant as Shareholder of Kenora Corporation Limited): Lim Yew Cheng; 2nd Plaintiff: Lin Minghan; 3rd Plaintiff (personal and Derivative Claimant as Shareholder of Xeno Origin Limited): Ma Kwok Leung; 1st Defendant: Cosimo Borrelli; 2nd Defendant: Meade Wilbur Malone; 3rd Defendant: Guanghua SS Holdings Limited; 4th Defendant: China Cinda (HK) Asset Management Co. Limited; 5th Defendant: Kenora Corporation Limited; 6th Defendant: Xeno Origin Limited
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 16 May 2025
- Case Number
- HCA1976/2023
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Against Master's Decision on Security for Costs / Appeal (paper Disposal on Costs)
- Outcome
- Master's costs order upheld; Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs of summonses and of the appeal to Defendants
- Legal Topics
- Security for Costs, Costs Order, Form of Security, Bank Guarantee, Appeal Against Costs
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Lim Yew Cheng
1st Plaintiff (personal and Derivative Claimant as Shareholder of Kenora Corporation Limited)
Lin Minghan
2nd Plaintiff
Ma Kwok Leung
3rd Plaintiff (personal and Derivative Claimant as Shareholder of Xeno Origin Limited)
Cosimo Borrelli
1st Defendant
Meade Wilbur Malone
2nd Defendant
Guanghua SS Holdings Limited
3rd Defendant
China Cinda (HK) Asset Management Co. Limited
4th Defendant
Kenora Corporation Limited
5th Defendant
Xeno Origin Limited
6th Defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Master's Decision on Security for Costs / Appeal (paper Disposal on Costs)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Master erred in ordering costs to the Defendants
- 2 Whether Plaintiffs could vary form of security (banker\u2019s draft/guarantee v cash)
- 3 Whether costs of the summonses should be in the cause or awarded to Defendants
Ratio Decidendi
The Master did not err and his costs order was reasonable: Plaintiffs failed to negotiate adequate security and ignored a reasonable offer, thereby justifying the award of costs to Defendants; the appeal\u2019s costs are awarded to Defendants and to be taxed if not agreed.
Court Disposition
Master's costs order upheld; Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs of summonses and of the appeal to Defendants
Orders
- Consent order dated 19 December 2024 allowing alternative form of security without affecting quantum
- Master\u2019s security order maintained: Plaintiffs to provide security of HK$1,500,000 for D1 and D2 and HK$1,160,000 for D3 and D4 (quantum unchanged)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment