Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs of appeal

Legal area

Court

12 Dec 2025

BGA HOLDINGS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) (formerly known as BEIBU GULF OCEAN SHIPPING (GROUP) LTD ) AND OTHERS v. CHU KONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1121
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV546/2024

Because the Plaintiffs succeeded on appeal, they are entitled to the costs of the appeal (including the costs of the Respondent's Notice) with a certificate for two counsel, to be summarily assessed; however, since the court on appeal applied a different (new) approach than the judge below, the appropriate order for specified interlocutory summonses between the Plaintiffs and the 12th Defendant is no order as to costs, while the judge's costs order in respect of the Amendment Summons is undisturbed.
11 Dec 2025

HKSAR v. LEUNG CHUNG MAN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1115
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC105/2023

Although both applicants had brought some suspicion upon themselves at trial, the Court found that the charge under section 37DA(1) was inappropriate on the facts and allowed the appeals; the Court exercised its discretion to award each applicant 50% of the costs of the trial and 50% of the costs of the appeal (including hearings incidental thereto), ordered costs to be taxed if not agreed, and refused the 2nd applicant's application for a certificate for two counsel.
25 Aug 2025

YIM TIN FOOK, since deceased (YIM LOK MAN WINNE, appointed by Order dated 10 May 2024 to represent the Estate of YIM TIN FOOK, deceased) AND ANOTHER v. YU CHOR LAI, KONG WAI HUNG and SOU KA LUN trading as WANG CHEUNG INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 772
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV5/2020

The court held that the plaintiffs are the overall winners because they succeeded in maintaining the substantive reliefs (Question 3) and the consequence of the appeal is dismissal of D2's counterclaim and an order for demolition and vacant possession; therefore costs are prima facie awarded to the plaintiffs but must be reduced to reflect plaintiffs' failure on Questions 1 and 2 which caused substantial additional argument, resulting in an award that D2 and DC8 jointly and severally pay 50% of the plaintiffs' costs overall, apportioned 70% to D2 and 30% to DC8, with specific liabilities for…
20 Feb 2025

WOO KWOK PING v. THE INCORPORATED MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF TSUEN WAN TRADE ASSOCIATION PRIMARY SCHOOL

Citation

[2025] HKCA 168
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV282/2023

The court refused to vary the order nisi except for two limited adjustments: costs of the application to the judge for leave to appeal shall exclude costs relating to the factual challenge (Ground 3), and the plaintiff's own costs during legal aid periods are to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations; otherwise the defendant must pay the plaintiff the costs of the appeal (including leave applications) and 60% of the plaintiff's costs of the action and counterclaim as ordered, and the defendant must pay the costs of the summons.
20 Jan 2025

香港特別行政區訴柯育進

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 245
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA220/2023

The appeal was allowed because the trial judge's reasoning rejecting fabrication and dismissing PW2's account was unsatisfactory and insufficient to sustain conviction; accordingly the conviction was overturned and costs awarded, with amounts adjusted to reflect that only two of six grounds succeeded and the simplicity of the case.
4 Nov 2024

WESOFT NATIONMARK LTD v. NATIONMARK (H.K.) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3016
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1317/2019

The court exercised its costs discretion to order the plaintiff to pay one third of the costs incurred by the 1st to 3rd defendants in opposing the Request for Further and Better Particulars and to pay the costs of the appeal to the 1st to 3rd defendants, and summarily assessed the quantum at HK$25,000 for the opposition and HK$34,000 for the appeal costs.
4 Nov 2024

WESOFT NATIONMARK LTD v. NATIONMARK (H.K.) LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3016
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA724/2019

The court exercised its discretion to order the plaintiff to pay one third of the 1st to 3rd defendants' costs of opposing the plaintiff's Request for Further and Better Particulars and to pay the costs of the appeal to the 1st to 3rd defendants, directed summary assessment on paper with specified lodgement deadlines, and summarily assessed the relevant sums at HK$25,000 and HK$34,000 respectively.
8 May 2024

V CAPITAL LTD v. MARGARET CHIU

Citation

[2024] HKCA 413
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV497/2021

The Court refused to vary the costs order nisi because the matters relied on by the Creditor (delay, conduct, disclosure failures and absence of trustee consent) had been considered and were either primarily relevant to the proceedings below or insufficient to justify depriving the Debtor, who succeeded on Ground 2, of all her appeal costs; an appellant may appeal an order affecting personal liberty without trustee consent; accordingly the costs order nisi awarding the Debtor 50% of the appeal costs was made absolute and the Creditor's summons dismissed.
18 Dec 2023

WONG TO YICK WOOD LOCK OINTMENT LTD v. SINGAPORE MEDICINE CO. AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1354
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV225/2021

The Court made absolute its earlier order nisi: (a) the defendants are awarded the costs of the appeal (with certificate for two counsel) and such costs are to be in the cause of the retrial; (b) the parties' costs below remain in the cause of the retrial; (c) because the CFI Judgment has been set aside the Disclosure Affirmations and exhibits filed pursuant to it must be returned, destroyed, deleted and removed from the court file and the plaintiff and its agents restrained from using information derived from them; (d) the plaintiff's proposed undertakings were insufficient to restore partie…
28 Nov 2022

OPERA NATIONAL DE PARIS v. SUN BON INTERNATIONAL LOGISTIC LTD

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1382
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ218/2021

The court varied the previous costs order nisi: the costs of the summary judgment application are to be costs in the cause; the plaintiff must pay the defendant's costs of the appeal with a certificate for counsel and those costs are to be assessed summarily; the court imposed a timetable for the defendant to lodge a statement of costs within 7 days and for the plaintiff to lodge objections within 7 days thereafter; no order as to costs of the variation application.