Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Costs contribution

  • 31 Jul 2023

    SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. LEE PAK NAP

    Citation
    [2023] HKCFI 1972
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP587/2022

    Defendant committed a deliberate breach of both the Police Doxxing Injunction and the Anonymity Order but the overall gravity was relatively low given limited dissemination and defendant's cooperation, prompt admission at interview, purging of the post and good character; significant prosecutorial delay (22 months) warranted mitigation; balancing aggravating and mitigating factors, the appropriate penalty was 21 days immediate imprisonment suspended for 12 months together with a contribution to costs of HK$50,000.

  • 31 Jul 2012

    CNLC v. LTY

    Citation
    CNLC v. LTY
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC16895/2011

    Applying the broad‑brush approach and concluding the Husband has access to substantial family resources (judicious encouragement) and that his financial disclosure was deficient, the court assessed immediate reasonable needs at HK$287,016/month, credited the Wife with earning capacity of HK$100,000/month plus HK$12,600 rental income, and ordered the Husband to pay the shortfall of HK$174,000/month from 1 August 2012; the Wife's application for contribution to legal costs was refused because she had deployable assets and had not demonstrated inability to fund representation.

  • 16 Jul 2010

    CHAN SAU CHUN v. WIN CAPTIAL (HK) LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    CHAN SAU CHUN v. WIN CAPTIAL (HK) LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCPI1178/2002

    The canopy collapse was principally caused by severe corrosion and failure to maintain the cantilevered canopy for which the Incorporated Owners (4th defendant) bore primary culpability; contributory causes included long-term storage loading in the unauthorised Hut, recent debris placed by demolition and scaffold diagonal bracing resting on the canopy edge. Balancing causative potency and blameworthiness the court apportioned liability 35% to the 1st defendant and 65% to the 4th defendant and ordered the 1st defendant to contribute 35% of the plaintiffs' costs on the issue of quantum; costs o…