PROGETTO JEWELLERY CO LTD 對 LAU CHIU YING 及另一人

PROGETTO JEWELLERY CO LTD 對 LAU CHIU YING 及另一人

The court accepted that the hearing may proceed in Chinese without a special order and that interpreters can be provided, but refused the appellant's broad late application for translations of all legal documents because the appellant failed to prove she was not proficient in English for the documents in issue and the request, made after key stages and after appeal deadlines, would not produce practical benefit and would impose disproportionate cost; limited translation need was recognised for specific complex court documents but the court exercised its discretion to refuse the general order and awarded reduced costs of HKD 8,000 to the respondent.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 936
Parties
Plaintiff (original Action) and 2nd Defendant (counterclaim): PROGETTO JEWELLERY COMPANY LIMITED; 1st Defendant (original Action) / Appellant: LAU CHIU YING; 2nd Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim): JOY DESIGN COMPANY LIMITED; 1st Defendant (counterclaim): FUNG PUI WA
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 April 2021
Case Number
HCA2548/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Concerning Court Language and Translation Requests / Hearing and Judgment on Appeal (appeal From Registrar's Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Use of Chinese as Court Language, Requests for Translation of Legal Documents, Statutory Language Rules (cap.5 and Cap.5 C), Judicial Discretion in Ordering Translations, Costs Orders
Source Language
CH
Civil Procedure Language Rights Costs and Taxation Use of Chinese as Court Language Requests for Translation of Legal Documents Statutory Language Rules (cap.5 and Cap.5 C) Judicial Discretion in Ordering Translations Costs Orders

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

Parties

PROGETTO JEWELLERY COMPANY LIMITED

Plaintiff (original Action) and 2nd Defendant (counterclaim)

LAU CHIU YING

1st Defendant (original Action) / Appellant

JOY DESIGN COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Defendant (original Action) and Plaintiff (counterclaim)

FUNG PUI WA

1st Defendant (counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Concerning Court Language and Translation Requests / Hearing and Judgment on Appeal (appeal From Registrar's Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing should be conducted in Chinese
  2. 2 Whether respondent must provide Chinese translations of all legal documents
  3. 3 Standards and procedures under Cap.5 and Cap.5C for requiring translations

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted that the hearing may proceed in Chinese without a special order and that interpreters can be provided, but refused the appellant's broad late application for translations of all legal documents because the appellant failed to prove she was not proficient in English for the documents in issue and the request, made after key stages and after appeal deadlines, would not produce practical benefit and would impose disproportionate cost; limited translation need was recognised for specific complex court documents but the court exercised its discretion to refuse the general order and awarded reduced costs of HKD 8,000 to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Registrar's costs order for HKD 28,000 set aside
  • Appellant to pay respondent provisional costs of HKD 8,000; either party may apply to vary the provisional costs order within 14 days, otherwise it becomes final