CHAN ALEX AND ANOTHER v. TAKE CARE LOGISTICS LTD

CHAN ALEX AND ANOTHER v. TAKE CARE LOGISTICS LTD

The summons to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed because the sanctioned offer was not properly constituted and the defendant's conduct was not unreasonable to such a high degree as to justify indemnity costs or enhanced interest; Order 62 rule 5 does not equate to Order 22 rule 24 and cannot be used to give effect to an invalid sanctioned offer.

Citation
CHAN ALEX AND ANOTHER v. TAKE CARE LOGISTICS LTD
Parties
Plaintiffs: CHAN ALEX and CHAN ARRON; Defendant: TAKE CARE LOGISTICS LIMITED
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 July 2017
Case Number
DCCJ5024/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (district Court) / Post Judgment Costs Variation Hearing (summons to Vary Costs Order)
Outcome
Summons dismissed; Costs Order Nisi made absolute; application for indemnity costs and enhanced interest refused
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Sanctioned Offer, Indemnity Costs, Interest on Judgment, Settlement Offers
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Costs Law Civil Litigation Costs Orders Sanctioned Offer Indemnity Costs Interest on Judgment Settlement Offers

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

Parties

CHAN ALEX and CHAN ARRON

Plaintiffs

TAKE CARE LOGISTICS LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (district Court) / Post Judgment Costs Variation Hearing (summons to Vary Costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to indemnity costs and enhanced interest having obtained a judgment more advantageous than their Sanctioned Offer
  2. 2 Whether the Sanctioned Offer was valid and can attract consequences under Order 22 rule 24
  3. 3 Whether the court may, under Order 62 rule 5(1)(d), take a non-sanctioned offer into account to justify indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The summons to vary the Costs Order Nisi was dismissed because the sanctioned offer was not properly constituted and the defendant's conduct was not unreasonable to such a high degree as to justify indemnity costs or enhanced interest; Order 62 rule 5 does not equate to Order 22 rule 24 and cannot be used to give effect to an invalid sanctioned offer.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; Costs Order Nisi made absolute; application for indemnity costs and enhanced interest refused

Orders

  • Summons dismissed.
  • Costs Order Nisi made absolute.