ARTIFICIAL LIFE, INC. v. KPMG (a firm) AND OTHERS

ARTIFICIAL LIFE, INC. v. KPMG (a firm) AND OTHERS

The claimed costs were disproportionate on a party-and-party basis; applying the Poon Shu Fan two-stage test and a sensible standard of necessity, the court reduced individual items, fixed appropriate party-and-party hourly rates for specified fee earners, disallowed certain conference fees, apportioned counsel's brief fee and assessed the defendants' recoverable costs at HK$422,483.33, ordering the plaintiffs to pay that sum forthwith.

Citation
ARTIFICIAL LIFE, INC. v. KPMG (a firm) AND OTHERS
Parties
1st Plaintiff: ARTIFICIAL LIFE, INC.; 2nd Plaintiff: ARTIFICIAL LIFE ASIA LIMITED; 3rd Plaintiff: ARTIFICIAL LIFE EUROPE GMBH; 1st Defendant: KPMG (a firm); 2nd Defendant: ANDREW WALTER B.R. WEIR; 3rd Defendant: IAN MARTIN PARKER
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 September 2013
Case Number
HCA2168/2011
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment (civil) / Summary Assessment of Costs (decision on Paper Disposal)
Outcome
Costs assessed in part for the defendants; plaintiffs ordered to pay reduced sum
Legal Topics
Summary Assessment of Costs, Party and Party Costs, Taxation of Costs, Apportionment of Counsel Fees, Hourly Rates
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Advocates' Fees Summary Assessment of Costs Party and Party Costs Taxation of Costs Apportionment of Counsel Fees Hourly Rates

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ARTIFICIAL LIFE, INC.

1st Plaintiff

ARTIFICIAL LIFE ASIA LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

ARTIFICIAL LIFE EUROPE GMBH

3rd Plaintiff

KPMG (a firm)

1st Defendant

ANDREW WALTER B.R. WEIR

2nd Defendant

IAN MARTIN PARKER

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment (civil) / Summary Assessment of Costs (decision on Paper Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants' claimed costs were necessary or proper under O.62 r.28(2) RHC and Practice Direction 14.3
  2. 2 Appropriate party-and-party hourly rates for solicitors and fee earners
  3. 3 Whether individual billed items (bundles, attendances, drafting, perusal, preparation, counsel conferencing) were necessary, proportionate and recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

The claimed costs were disproportionate on a party-and-party basis; applying the Poon Shu Fan two-stage test and a sensible standard of necessity, the court reduced individual items, fixed appropriate party-and-party hourly rates for specified fee earners, disallowed certain conference fees, apportioned counsel's brief fee and assessed the defendants' recoverable costs at HK$422,483.33, ordering the plaintiffs to pay that sum forthwith.

Court Disposition

Costs assessed in part for the defendants; plaintiffs ordered to pay reduced sum

Orders

  • The plaintiffs shall forthwith pay costs in the sum of HK$422,483.33 to the defendants.