KP FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD v. ETERNALUCK LTD AND ANOTHER

KP FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD v. ETERNALUCK LTD AND ANOTHER

The judge held that the contested strike out application was not sufficiently legally or factually complex to justify Senior Counsel; accordingly Senior Counsel fees were disallowed. The court treated the initial irregular application by letter as not fatal but made costs orders reflecting that irregularity. The plaintiff's summary assessment was adjusted accordingly and the Charging Order Nisi was discharged. These conclusions followed from applying the necessity test for Senior Counsel fees and the principle that procedural irregularity is excused absent prejudice.

Citation
KP FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD v. ETERNALUCK LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Third Party: ALAN HO & COMPANY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 March 2017
Case Number
HCA2525/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Costs and Strike Out Proceedings / Decision on Costs (summary Assessment and Enforcement)
Outcome
Costs order varied and re‑assessed; Charging Order Nisi discharged; costs orders nisi made accordingly.
Legal Topics
Summary Assessment of Costs, Strike Out Application, Charging Order Nisi, Variation of Costs Order
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Enforcement Summary Assessment of Costs Strike Out Application Charging Order Nisi Variation of Costs Order

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

Parties

ALAN HO & COMPANY

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Costs and Strike Out Proceedings / Decision on Costs (summary Assessment and Enforcement)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order nisi of 16 December 2016 should be varied
  2. 2 Whether senior counsel fees were necessary and therefore recoverable
  3. 3 Whether the Charging Order Nisi should stand or be discharged

Ratio Decidendi

The judge held that the contested strike out application was not sufficiently legally or factually complex to justify Senior Counsel; accordingly Senior Counsel fees were disallowed. The court treated the initial irregular application by letter as not fatal but made costs orders reflecting that irregularity. The plaintiff's summary assessment was adjusted accordingly and the Charging Order Nisi was discharged. These conclusions followed from applying the necessity test for Senior Counsel fees and the principle that procedural irregularity is excused absent prejudice.

Court Disposition

Costs order varied and re‑assessed; Charging Order Nisi discharged; costs orders nisi made accordingly.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's costs for summary assessment reduced and assessed at HK$269,430.
  • Leave granted to the 1st defendant to withdraw its summons dated 3 February 2017 with no order as to costs of the summons or the consent application.