SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. LAU FOOK KEUNG AND OTHERS

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. LAU FOOK KEUNG AND OTHERS

The court exercised its discretion to vary the costs order nisi: it upheld the order that the 1st defendants pay the non-party's costs to be taxed on a common fund basis, and varied the plaintiffs' costs award so that the 1st defendants must pay 80% of the plaintiffs' costs of the appeal, to be taxed on a party and party basis; costs of the application to vary are part of the appeal costs.

Citation
SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. LAU FOOK KEUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: SHINY DEVELOP LIMITED; 1st Defendant: KAN WAI CHUNG; 1st Defendant: KAN KAR FAI; 1st Defendant: KAN WAI MING; 1st Defendant: LAU FOOK KEUNG; 1st Defendant: KAN FOR PING STEVEN; 2nd Defendant: BARBICAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: TSANG WING KEI, WILKIE; Non Party: Non-Party
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 May 2010
Case Number
HCA1520/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appellate Ruling on Costs (consolidated Actions) / Post Appeal Costs Determination (ruling on Costs Nisi Varied)
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied in part: order as to non-party upheld; plaintiffs awarded 80% of appeal costs; application costs treated as part of appeal costs.
Legal Topics
Specific Discovery, Taxation of Costs, Party and Party Costs, Common Fund Costs, Indemnity Costs, Costs Apportionment
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Appeal Specific Discovery Taxation of Costs Party and Party Costs Common Fund Costs Indemnity Costs +1 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

SHINY DEVELOP LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

KAN WAI CHUNG

1st Defendant

KAN KAR FAI

1st Defendant

KAN WAI MING

1st Defendant

LAU FOOK KEUNG

1st Defendant

KAN FOR PING STEVEN

1st Defendant

BARBICAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT LIMITED

2nd Defendant

TSANG WING KEI, WILKIE

3rd Defendant

Non-Party

Non Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appellate Ruling on Costs (consolidated Actions) / Post Appeal Costs Determination (ruling on Costs Nisi Varied)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be apportioned to reflect partial success on appeal
  2. 2 Whether non-party was entitled to indemnity costs or only common fund costs
  3. 3 Whether court should vary its costs order nisi and set proportion of costs payable by 1st defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to vary the costs order nisi: it upheld the order that the 1st defendants pay the non-party's costs to be taxed on a common fund basis, and varied the plaintiffs' costs award so that the 1st defendants must pay 80% of the plaintiffs' costs of the appeal, to be taxed on a party and party basis; costs of the application to vary are part of the appeal costs.

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied in part: order as to non-party upheld; plaintiffs awarded 80% of appeal costs; application costs treated as part of appeal costs.

Orders

  • 1st defendants to pay the non-party's costs of the application below and of the appeal to the non-party, to be taxed on a common fund basis if not agreed.
  • 1st defendants to pay 80% of the plaintiffs' costs of the appeal, to be taxed on a party and party basis if not agreed.