31 Jul 2025
Because the plaintiff failed to challenge the provisional costs order and submitted no response, the court exercised its summary assessment power and, having regard to the similar background of both cases, fixed reasonable costs at HK$20,000 per case instead of the higher amounts claimed by the defendant.
10 Mar 2025
On summary assessment the court found items D1 and D2 (together 35 man‑hours totalling HK$149,700) grossly excessive and allowed HK$70,000; Item E (22 man‑hours totalling HK$48,200) was unparticularized and excessive and HK$20,000 was allowed; counsel's brief fee of HK$100,000 was excessive given the issues were not new and HK$60,000 was allowed; adopting a broad‑brush approach the Plaintiff's costs were assessed at HK$200,000 and no further costs order was made for the summary assessment.
10 Dec 2024
The court found the Order 22 payments (HK$1 on 29/10/2020 and HK$49,999 on 11/2/2022) were validly filed and served; the plaintiff did not accept them within the prescribed periods and failed to obtain a better result against the second defendant. It was not unjust to apply Rule 23, therefore the interim costs order was varied: plaintiff to pay second defendant party-and-party costs to 25 November 2020 and indemnity costs from 26 November 2020 (including wasted trial dates), and to pay interest on the indemnity costs at a rate 2% above the judgment rate; the court refused to order indemnity c…
29 Nov 2024
Applying a broad‑brush summary assessment and adopting the reductions proposed, the judge reduced the defendants' claimed costs and assessed the hearing costs at $796,500 and the Costs Summons at $35,000, and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendants forthwith with a certificate for two counsel for the hearing.
10 Oct 2024
The sanctioned payment of HK$100,000 made on 3 January 2019 was valid; the plaintiff failed to show it would be unjust to apply RDC Order 22 rule 23(2)-(4) and therefore the Court ordered costs on a party-and-party basis up to and inclusive of 31 January 2019 and on an indemnity basis from and inclusive of 1 February 2019, interest at 3% above judgment rate on costs after 31 January 2019, payment of the sanctioned sum to the defendant forthwith, and indemnity costs for the summons application.
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.
23 Jan 2024
The court refused the applicant's request for an oral costs assessment and applied the party-and-party standard by written (summary) assessment, fixed appropriate hourly rates (HK$5,600 for the senior solicitor; HK$3,200 for the junior solicitor), disallowed multiple charges for the same single item, adjusted several items downward because of overlap with work done at first instance, reduced counsel's fee to HK$70,000 and assessed total recoverable costs at HK$93,000 payable by the applicant to the respondent.
2 Nov 2023
The confidentiality provision was confined to settlement negotiations and did not create an additional element to be bettered at trial; plaintiffs rejected an unconditional offer of HK$63,333.40 plus costs, proceeded to trial and obtained a less advantageous result, engaging Order 22 r 23; it was not unjust to award enhanced interest and indemnity costs given the circumstances and conduct; applying the compensatory rationale and local precedent the court exercised discretion to order party-to-party costs up to and including 23 August 2017, indemnity costs thereafter, and interest on post-23 A…
13 Oct 2023
The court varied the original Nisi Order: Super Jade was not ordered to pay Sun's costs of the Original Claim because Sun was found to be the beneficial owner of Super Jade; however Super Jade must pay SWS's costs of the Counterclaim on an indemnity basis because Super Jade contractually agreed to indemnify SWS in the account opening Terms and Conditions and Lin authorised the relevant representations; costs of Sun and Shum in the Counterclaim are to be paid by Lin on a party-and-party basis; certificates for two counsel were permitted where indemnity costs were ordered; and Sun was ordered t…
25 Aug 2023
The Master upheld the taxation allowances made at the taxation hearing: hourly rates for the identified fee-earners and rates for trainee/para-legal staff were reasonable for their experience and periods claimed; items challenged were, item-by-item, either properly allowed or appropriately reduced after review; briefs and fee notes satisfied the Order 62 requirement for counsel fees; the solicitor's certificate on the bill was prima facie evidence of client liability and Mr Tang produced no evidence to rebut it; the review was an abuse of process when used to re-litigate the underlying decisi…