20 Feb 2024
Plaintiff must pay the defendant's costs because she initiated and then discontinued the proceedings; her legal aid application and unrelated personal injury matters do not negate liability. The court assessed the defendant's submitted bill and fixed reasonable costs at two-thirds of the bill, rounded to HK$30,000.
30 Jan 2019
The court excused the short delay on special grounds, applied the principle that costs should follow the event and found the overall outcome was essentially a draw as between the Respondents and the 2nd and 3rd Petitioners because the Respondents' petition succeeded only against the 1st Petitioner; accordingly the original costs order nisi did not reflect the result and should be varied so that the 1st Petitioner alone pays the costs of both proceedings and there is no order as to costs between the 2nd and 3rd Petitioners and the Respondents.
31 May 2011
Once Dah Sing was allowed to withdraw from the action, previously made orders that declared costs to be 'costs in the cause' do not create ongoing liability against Dah Sing; those costs become payable by the parties remaining in the action and are recoverable from the losing party or parties at the final trial, not from the withdrawing insurer.
17 Nov 2004
The court found an oral retainer existed between the Plaintiff and the two Defendants for the conduct of the litigation; the second signed quotation was a fee agreement limited as to G-Prop's engagement (to consider merit only) which ended when counsel advised no defence; consequently the Defendants (jointly with G-Prop to the extent of the deposit) were liable for the 1st Bill but the Plaintiff failed to prove entitlement to the 2nd Bill due to lack of confirmed instructions and evidence of work, and therefore judgment was allowed for the 1st Bill and the 2nd Bill dismissed.
22 Jan 2001
The Director is liable under s16C(1)(b)(ia) for the costs occasioned by the counterclaim and under s16C(1)(b)(ib) for the costs of the appeals because Mr Cheung was the plaintiff in the counterclaim in the court below; a respondent's notice seeking to affirm the lower court does not equate to a cross-appeal; and the costs of the counterclaim include the costs of the originating judicial review proceedings; declarations were granted accordingly.