Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to appeal costs order

Legal area

Court

21 Jan 2021

SHIH-HUA INVESTMENT CO., LTD (suing for and on behalf of itself as shareholder of EVERGLORY ENERGY LTD v. ZHANG AIDONG AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCA 81
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV188/2017

The appeal was dismissed as academic because the company’s claims belong to the company and the independent Reconstituted Board and subsequently the liquidators had declined to pursue them; a contributory cannot continue the company’s litigation contrary to those officers of the company or liquidators, and SH had not obtained leave to appeal the costs order under s.14(3) High Court Ordinance; permitting SH to continue would be an abuse of process given lack of objective documentary evidence and the liquidators' position.
10 Nov 2020

黃坤平對張素芬

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2840
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1716/2011

The applications were dismissed because the applicant failed the threshold requirement of demonstrating an arguable appeal with a reasonable prospect of success and failed to show any other good reason to justify a stay; the costs order was a proper exercise of judicial discretion and the judge identified no error in principle or fact that would justify leave or a stay.
10 Oct 2014

JJBGMK v. JPLY

Citation

JJBGMK v. JPLY
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP61/2011

The court held that the Father's one-off HK$160,000 payment should be given limited credit (approximately HK$27,000) against backdated maintenance but no further set-off/order was necessary; the Mother's application for leave to appeal the costs order was refused for lack of reasonable prospect of success; none of the four summons resolved by undertakings warranted an adverse costs order against the Father and therefore no order as to costs was made for those summons; the Mother was ordered to pay the Father's costs of her leave application (to be taxed if not agreed) with a certificate for c…
14 Mar 2011

CLEMENCIA MANANSALA GALLAGHER v. MARK EDWARD KIRKHAM

Citation

CLEMENCIA MANANSALA GALLAGHER v. MARK EDWARD KIRKHAM
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP83/2011

The Court refused the extension of time because the delay was substantial and wholly inexcusable and the proposed appeal lacked the requisite merit to overcome that delay; accordingly leave to appeal the costs order was also refused and the judge's conclusions on trust construction and awarding indemnity costs were not disturbed given the judge's evidential findings and discretion.

Hong Kong Case Law

SHIH-HUA INVESTMENT CO., LTD (suing for and on behalf of itself as shareholder of EVERGLORY ENERGY LTD v. ZHANG AIDONG AND OTHERS

黃坤平 對 張素芬

JJBGMK v. JPLY

CLEMENCIA MANANSALA GALLAGHER v. MARK EDWARD KIRKHAM

黃坤平對張素芬