Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs — common fund

Legal area

Court

17 May 2012

CHEUNG TUNG LAN, TONY v. YANG YONGDONG AND OTHERS

Citation

CHEUNG TUNG LAN, TONY v. YANG YONGDONG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP447/2012

The application for inspection was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to establish a proper purpose under s152FA (and thus did not meet the statutory test), sought overly broad and largely irrelevant categories of documents, and was not able to demonstrate a sufficiently reasonable case for investigation; consequentially costs were awarded to the defendants and the costs of the 1st–3rd defendants were ordered to be taxed on a common fund basis.
3 Dec 1990

J.E.T. JUDICIAL EXTERNAL TRADING S.A v. OMTIS LTD.

Citation

J.E.T. JUDICIAL EXTERNAL TRADING S.A v. OMTIS LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8148/1988

The hearsay documentary evidence (meeting record, expense breakdown and invoices) proved the 2nd defendant's contractual liability to contribute 50% of promotional expenses, entitling the plaintiff by counterclaim to judgment for HK$171,413.60 with interest from the dates specified in the meeting minutes and costs on the common fund basis due to the defendant's default and overseas status.
19 Jul 1988

TSO YUK YIN v. KO WAI MING

Citation

TSO YUK YIN v. KO WAI MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV55/1988

Appeal dismissed: where a party, aware of alleged non-disclosure, consents to continuation of an interlocutory order it cannot later set aside the consent order on that ground; respondent's continued operation of the business after mutual dissolution did not breach fiduciary duties and preserved partnership goodwill, so discharging the injunction was not warranted.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHEUNG TUNG LAN, TONY v. YANG YONGDONG AND OTHERS

J.E.T. JUDICIAL EXTERNAL TRADING S.A v. OMTIS LTD.

TSO YUK YIN v. KO WAI MING