Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Legal aid taxation

Legal area

Court

16 Oct 2025

HUNG PUI MAN v. INTERCONTINENTAL LIMOUSINE COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1721
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI4214/2022

The court held that indemnity costs for the entire action are warranted because the plaintiff proceeded with a claim despite having earlier access to defendant documents that exposed clear inconsistencies and rendered the pleaded case highly unreasonable; awarded defendant indemnity costs with certificate for counsel to be taxed if not agreed; ordered enhanced interest at judgment rate plus 5% from 22 June 2023 to 19 March 2025 and thereafter until full payment; sanctioned payments totalling HK$50,000 (plus any accrued interest) to be paid out to the defendant; refused to make a wasted costs…
1 Aug 2025

INDAH, VEBY MEGA v. OWT ASIA LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCA 720
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV322/2021

The NLATO was set aside because the judge failed to comply with the procedural requirements for wasted costs proceedings under Order 62 rules 8-8E and Practice Direction 14.5 by not giving the legal representative prior intimation and a reasonable opportunity to show cause; therefore the NLATO was procedurally unfair and must be vacated; it was unnecessary to resolve the substantive test for wasted costs.
5 Feb 2025

LI CHI SUM v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE for and on behalf of THE DIRECTOR OF FIRE SERVICES

Citation

[2025] HKDC 175
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEO5/2018

The court held that the respondent was entitled to costs of the successful strike out application and, notwithstanding contested amendment rules, to costs of and occasioned by the amendment application and the costs of its hearing because the claimant required leave to amend, failed to give the respondent a draft before issuing the summons, insisted on retaining disputed paragraphs until the hearing making the hearing unavoidable, and therefore the respondent should recover costs; the claimant's own costs are to be taxed under the Legal Aid Regulations.
8 Jan 2025

CHAN YUET CHUN v. HOSPITAL AUTHORITY

Citation

[2025] HKDC 42
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1749/2020

By consent the court varied the costs order nisi to award costs of the Defendant’s Summons filed 24 May 2024, including all costs reserved, to the Defendant to be taxed if not agreed; ordered the Plaintiff to pay HK$700 for the Consent Summons; ordered that costs of the Defendant’s Summons be borne by the Plaintiff’s solicitors personally as a wasted costs order; and disallowed legal aid taxation in respect of specified items.
20 Dec 2024

CHEUNG HON KIN v. CHUBB LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD (formerly known as NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE WORLDWIDE LTD and ACE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD respectively)

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3623
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2711/2016

It was not unjust to make the orders under RHC O.22 r.23. The costs order nisi was varied: costs allocated between plaintiff and Director of Legal Aid according to periods of legal aid; indemnity costs ordered for the period 21 June 2023 to date of judgment payable by the plaintiff; enhanced interest awarded at 4% above judgment rate (12.875% p.a.) for the Director/paid period 11 April 2019–20 June 2023 and at 5% above judgment rate (13.875% p.a.) for plaintiff for 21 June 2023–date of judgment; sanctioned payments totalling HK$1,500,000 and accrued interest to be paid out to defendant; costs…
31 Oct 2023

RE ZZH

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2814
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMH57/2021

The court held that the claimed bill of HK$226,845.34 was excessive because several items were unnecessary or disproportionate to a Part II application arising from the settled actions; applying proportionality and the common fund basis the proper assessment is HK$120,000 and solicitors are bound by their undertaking not to charge the applicant beyond that amount.
14 Sept 2021

INDAH, VEBY MEGA v. OWT ASIA LTD

Citation

[2021] HKDC 1137
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1264/2020

Applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success on either costs order: Dispute 2 was correctly ordered as costs following the event; Dispute 1 departure from the usual order was justified by the parties' conduct and factual matrix and not an error of principle; the NLATO appeal did not provide a sufficient 'interests of justice' reason to grant leave; retrospective leave to file the 4th affirmation was granted but did not alter merits; accordingly leave refused and summons dismissed.
13 Sept 2021

PM (formerly known as PJ) v. VM (also known as MV)

Citation

[2021] HKFC 188
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC614/2020

The husband failed to show any proper basis to vary the original costs order nisi; the court exercised its discretion to confirm the costs order nisi and dismissed the husband's summons dated 7 October 2020, ordering the husband to pay the wife's costs of and arising out of that summons on a party and party basis to be taxed if not agreed, with Legal Aid taxation of the wife's own costs.
10 Mar 2021

CMT v. ADS

Citation

[2021] HKFC 49
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC4383/2016

The court declined to vary the costs nisi. The Husband's summons was dismissed because he had not paid interim maintenance at a level he earlier proposed, proposed payment from decree absolute which the court found unreasonable, and the Wife's attempt to backdate did not justify depriving her of costs; therefore Husband ordered to pay the Wife's costs on a party and party basis and those costs to be taxed per the Legal Aid Regulations.
11 Jun 2019

LUIS, DESIREE RANTE AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2019] HKCFA 23
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV10/2018

The Court exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs (including leave applications) because the appeals turned on novel, important constitutional and statutory issues (notably s.11 HKBORO) that rendered the cases lead/test cases of public importance; consequently the usual rule that costs follow the event was displaced. The Court also granted a certificate for three counsel for the appellants for legal aid taxation purposes because the matters were exceptional in importance and complexity.