Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs and security for costs

Legal area

Court

8 Mar 2022

NG NIM CHUNG, DECEASED AND ANOTHER v. NG WING MAN TERRY

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 673
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2221/2016

The court exercised its discretion under O35 r2 to set aside the judgment because, on balance, the defendant's further explanations—though imperfect and late—warranted a second chance; however, finality and prejudice to plaintiffs required conditions: defendant must pay plaintiffs' costs and provide security of HK$400,000 into court pending taxation, failing which the order to set aside will lapse and the judgment will stand.
17 Apr 2013

WEAR ME APPAREL LLC v. LAM NA

Citation

WEAR ME APPAREL LLC v. LAM NA
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV32/2012

The Court upheld the trial judge's primary factual findings that the contested payments were loans to the defendant. The judge had given adequate, transparent reasons after resolving relevant sub‑issues; there was no error in his assessment of credibility or in drawing an adverse inference for not calling the husband. Accordingly the appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the plaintiff.
27 May 2011

YUN CHOI LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. LAM WAI MAN

Citation

YUN CHOI LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. LAM WAI MAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4893/2009

The court found on the evidence that the cars were sold as a three-car package for $900,000 via an intermediate purchaser Superior, and that the defendant paid the full package price to Mr Mak who had actual or apparent authority to collect; the Notices did not by themselves establish a direct contract between the plaintiff and the defendant for the two cars and the plaintiff's claim for unpaid consideration was dismissed; costs were ordered nisi against the plaintiff to the defendant to be taxed if not agreed, subject to 14 days for any challenge.
4 Feb 2010

WONG WING ON WILLIAM RONALD v. YAU PAK MAN AND 10 OTHERS

Citation

WONG WING ON WILLIAM RONALD v. YAU PAK MAN AND 10 OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV33/2009

The Court struck out the substantive appeal as it was unarguable and amounted to an abuse of process given the improbability that the proposed resolution would have contravened the New Grant (Director's approval would have been sought and was later granted). The Court nonetheless granted leave to appeal the costs order to the applicant and, unusually, granted the 1st and 2nd respondents leave to appeal the costs order out of time, and ordered a stay of execution of the costs order pending appeal while noting that the 11th respondent was protected by a charging order against the applicant's un…
20 Feb 2002

ATSUSHI USUI AND ANOTHERv. WONG TUNG YUEN AND OTHERS

Citation

ATSUSHI USUI AND ANOTHERv. WONG TUNG YUEN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA17010/1998

The Court found on the evidence there was no actual authority given by the 2nd or 3rd defendants to the 4th defendant to enter the Japanese memorandum on their behalf, and there was no representation by the 2nd or 3rd defendants that would give rise to apparent authority; accordingly the Japanese memorandum does not bind the 2nd and 3rd defendants. However the 4th defendant gave an implied warranty of authority to the 1st plaintiff and breached that warranty by purporting to act for the 2nd and 3rd defendants, but assessment of damages is deferred pending ascertainment of recoverability from…
4 May 2000

LIN SHUI LIN v. WONG HON HO AND ANOTHER

Citation

LIN SHUI LIN v. WONG HON HO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL14/2000

The petitioner remained an ordinary resident despite temporary studies abroad and therefore was eligible to stand; the 1st respondent's decision invalidating her nomination was incorrect; consequently the 2nd respondent was not duly elected and no other person was duly elected, and the 1st respondent must pay the petitioner's costs with the specified arrangements and release of security.
4 Oct 1995

CENTURY FIRST INVESTMENTS LTD. and Others v. LUNG PING and Others

Citation

CENTURY FIRST INVESTMENTS LTD. and Others v. LUNG PING and Others
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4925/1995

Because Cheng materially failed to disclose multiple facts highly relevant to the discretionary weighing exercise (notably his intimate relationship with the 1st Defendant, inconsistencies with prior pleadings and proceedings, and disputed account balances), the court was not satisfied there was a strong prima facie case of fraud and therefore discharged the ex parte Mareva injunction and refused to regrant it.

Hong Kong Case Law

NG NIM CHUNG, DECEASED AND ANOTHER v. NG WING MAN TERRY

WEAR ME APPAREL LLC v. LAM NA

YUN CHOI LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v. LAM WAI MAN

WONG WING ON WILLIAM RONALD v. YAU PAK MAN AND 10 OTHERS

ATSUSHI USUI AND ANOTHERv. WONG TUNG YUEN AND OTHERS

LIN SHUI LIN v. WONG HON HO AND ANOTHER

CENTURY FIRST INVESTMENTS LTD. and Others v. LUNG PING and Others