Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Discovery summons

Legal area

Court

29 Feb 2024

KEIRON PETER ARCH ROCHESTER v. GLORY SKY PRECIOUS METALS LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 551
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA395/2019

The court upheld the original costs order nisi and dismissed the plaintiff's application to vary it because the defendant was largely successful on the Witness Statement Summons, the plaintiff prevailed on a narrow Discovery issue (warranting lesser costs than the Master assessed for both summonses), and the Time Summons caused no prejudice and the defendant accepted responsibility for the application cost; overall the court exercised its discretion to avoid disproportionate taxation and ordered each party to bear their own costs of the appeal and the three summonses, with costs of the presen…
30 Sept 2022

RE CHUI TAK KEUNG DUNCAN

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 3018
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCBI2/2021

The application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the without prejudice proposal would have left provision of unredacted documents subject to the Debtor's approval and would not have put the Creditor in a better position; the Creditor legitimately incurred substantial costs to obtain discovery and subsequent voluntary disclosure justified the costs order; the costs order nisi therefore was not disproportionate and remains in force, with costs of the application summarily assessed at HKD 20,000.
30 Jun 2022

ANTONIA LOUISE ZOYA ANTON v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

Citation

[2022] HKDC 650
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC724/2020

Applicant must pay the respondent's costs of the Replacement Summons from 6 December 2021 onwards because the applicant failed to accept the respondent's Calderbank offer which would have limited costs; accordingly the court varied the costs order nisi in favour of the respondent and ordered summary assessment on paper with specified timelines.
31 Dec 2018

TIN FOO INVESTMENT CO LTD v. PREVIGOR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2870
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1675/2014

Although the defendants succeeded in a limited respect, they were defeated in the majority of their requests because the interrogatories and discovery were overly wide and misconceived; accordingly the court exercised its discretion to order the defendants to pay 90% of the plaintiff's costs both below and on appeal, varied the master's summary assessment to HK$85,500 and directed procedures for assessment of appeal costs.

Hong Kong Case Law

KEIRON PETER ARCH ROCHESTER v. GLORY SKY PRECIOUS METALS LTD

RE CHUI TAK KEUNG DUNCAN

ANTONIA LOUISE ZOYA ANTON v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

TIN FOO INVESTMENT CO LTD v. PREVIGOR DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER