SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN KAR FAI AND OTHERS

SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN KAR FAI AND OTHERS

The court varied the costs order nisi: the non-party's costs were ordered to be paid by the 1st defendants and taxed on a common fund basis; the earlier indemnity costs order in favour of the plaintiffs was set aside and replaced with an order that 80% of the plaintiffs' costs of the appeal be paid by the 1st defendants to the plaintiffs, to be taxed on a party and party basis; costs of the application to vary the costs order were treated as part of the appeal costs.

Citation
SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER v. KAN KAR FAI AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: SINO FAVOUR DEVELOPMENT LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: SHINY DEVELOP LIMITED; 1st Defendant (action Hca1517/2005): KAN WAI CHUNG; 1st Defendant (action Hca1518/2005): KAN KAR FAI; 1st Defendant (action Hca1519/2005): KAN WAI MING; 1st Defendant (action Hca1520/2005): LAU FOOK KEUNG; 1st Defendant (action Hca1521/2005): KAN FOR PING STEVEN; 2nd Defendant: BARBICAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: TSANG WING KEI, WILKIE; Non Party: Non-Party (unnamed in judgment)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 May 2010
Case Number
HCA1518/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (consolidated Actions) / Ruling on Costs (in Chambers)
Outcome
Costs order nisi varied as to plaintiffs; non-party costs remain to be taxed on a common fund basis; plaintiffs awarded 80% of appeal costs against 1st defendants on party and party basis; costs of the variation application treated as part of appeal costs.
Legal Topics
Specific Discovery, Costs Orders, Taxation of Costs, Apportionment of Costs, Indemnity Vs Party and Party
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Discovery Appeals Specific Discovery Costs Orders Taxation of Costs Apportionment of 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 4 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 (action Hca1517/2005)

KAN KAR FAI

1st Defendant (action Hca1518/2005)

KAN WAI MING

1st Defendant (action Hca1519/2005)

LAU FOOK KEUNG

1st Defendant (action Hca1520/2005)

KAN FOR PING STEVEN

1st Defendant (action Hca1521/2005)

BARBICAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT LIMITED

2nd Defendant

TSANG WING KEI, WILKIE

3rd Defendant

Non-Party (unnamed in judgment)

Non Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (consolidated Actions) / Ruling on Costs (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to vary the costs order nisi
  2. 2 Whether costs should be apportioned because the appellant was partially successful
  3. 3 Appropriate basis for taxation of costs for the non-party (common fund v indemnity)

Ratio Decidendi

The court varied the costs order nisi: the non-party's costs were ordered to be paid by the 1st defendants and taxed on a common fund basis; the earlier indemnity costs order in favour of the plaintiffs was set aside and replaced with an order that 80% of the plaintiffs' costs of the appeal be paid by the 1st defendants to the plaintiffs, to be taxed on a party and party basis; costs of the application to vary the costs order were treated as part of the appeal costs.

Court Disposition

Costs order nisi varied as to plaintiffs; non-party costs remain to be taxed on a common fund basis; plaintiffs awarded 80% of appeal costs against 1st defendants on party and party basis; costs of the variation application treated as part of appeal costs.

Orders

  • Costs of the application below to be paid by the 1st defendants to the non-party, to be taxed on a common fund basis if not agreed
  • Costs of the appeal to be paid by the 1st defendants to the non-party, to be taxed on a common fund basis if not agreed