Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Public interest litigation

Legal area

Court

12 Feb 2026

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCA 214
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP370/2023

The court exercised its discretion to reflect substantive success rather than formal outcome: although the Respondents succeeded overall, the Commission achieved partial success on important points that materially influenced the reasoning, justifying a limited departure from the usual rule; accordingly the Commission was ordered to pay two‑thirds of the Respondents' costs of the leave applications and the appeal, with no order as to costs for the summons.
12 Feb 2026

COMPETITION COMMISSION v. ATAL BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2026] HKCA 214
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV1093/2025

Although the Respondents succeeded overall, the Commission achieved partial substantive success on several points and key strands of the Respondents' arguments were rejected; exercising the court's discretion under Order 62 and relevant authorities, fair allocation requires the Commission to pay a substantial but not full proportion of the Respondents' costs; accordingly the Commission was ordered to pay two-thirds of the Respondents' costs of the leave applications and the appeal, taxed if not agreed, with no order as to costs for the summons.
3 Mar 2025

MA CHUN MAN v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 915
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL979/2024

The court exercised its broad discretion in light of competing principles: because the case was a rolled‑up hearing with a successful leave on Ground 5 that was public‑interest‑relevant (first decided under the new Safeguarding National Security Ordinance) but the Applicant failed the reasonable arguability test on multiple other grounds and lost substantively, it was just to apportion costs; the Applicant must pay 50% of the Respondent’s costs for the leave and substantive hearing and the Respondent’s costs of the variation application, all to be taxed with a certificate of two counsel if no…
7 Jan 2025

N v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 206
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL961/2021

The court exercised its discretion to vary the previous costs order nisi on a ground-by-ground basis: N must pay respondents' costs of her Expert Summons and of Grounds 1 and 2; there is no order as to costs for N's Grounds 3 and 4; M must pay respondents' costs of her Expert Summons and of Ground 2; respondents must pay M's costs of Ground 1; there is no order as to costs for M's Grounds 3 and 4; all costs awarded are to be taxed if not agreed with any set‑off applied; applicants' own costs to be taxed in accordance with legal aid regulations; and there is no order as to the costs of the var…
7 Jan 2025

M v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 206
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1034/2021

The court varied the prior costs order nisi by allocating costs on a ground/issue basis: N must pay respondents' costs of her Expert Summons and of Grounds 1 and 2; no order as to costs for N on Grounds 3 and 4; M must pay respondents' costs of her Expert Summons and Ground 2 while the respondents must pay M's costs of Ground 1; no order as to costs for M on Grounds 3 and 4; all awarded costs to be taxed if not agreed and any set‑off applied; applicants' own costs to be taxed in accordance with legal aid regulations; no order as to costs of the variation application. The court applied the gen…
31 Jan 2024

KWOK CHEUK KIN v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN COUNCIL

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 358
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1978/2023

Although the applicant lost the substantive challenge, the court found all three public interest litigation criteria satisfied, had granted leave on the basis that the challenge was reasonably arguable, and on balance the public interest in resolving the constitutional question before the election outweighed the applicant's procedural shortcomings; accordingly the appropriate order was no order as to costs.
28 Nov 2023

COOMBER, PETER JOHN v. LAU YIN HA, EVA (EVA LAU) AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1673
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3416/2022

The application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the Leung Kwok Hung public interest litigation principle does not apply to these strike-out proceedings; even if it were relevant, it does not override the court's broad discretion which must consider merits and likelihood of private gain; the Plaintiff's claims lacked merit and he could not show no private interest, and he failed to follow correct procedural steps, therefore the costs order nisi for indemnity costs is upheld and additional indemnity costs for the variation application are awarded.
3 Apr 2023

MK v. REGISTRAR OF HIGH COURT

Citation

[2023] HKCA 494
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV355/2021

Regulation 21's abrogating effect on legal professional privilege extends to relevant communications made before the grant of legal aid to prevent abuse; the public interest litigation exception to costs does not apply because the issue was not of general public importance, the applicant stood to obtain private gain, and the case lacked a real prospect of success on appeal; accordingly costs follow the event, with a 30% reduction of the Director's appellate costs for partial success and wastage, and full recovery of costs below.
23 Mar 2023

LAM WAI WING v. MISS YIM SHUN YEE ADA, THE CORONER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 807
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL194/2019

The Coroner's summing up to the jury was defective such that it amounted to a material irregularity rendering the jury's majority verdict of unlawful killing unsafe; accordingly certiorari was issued quashing the verdict and a fresh death inquest was ordered. On costs, the court reaffirmed the broad discretion to follow the event but to consider public interest litigation criteria and other conduct-related factors before departing from the general rule.
3 Mar 2022

FUNG PING SUM CONNIE v. APPEAL PANEL (ESTATE AGENTS ORDINANCE)

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 644
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL514/2021

Applicant failed to establish that the proceedings amounted to public interest litigation because the challenge was brought for private gain, Grounds 2 and 3 were personal, and Ground 1 as advanced was not reasonably arguable; therefore costs should follow the event and the order nisi for the Applicant to pay the Authority's costs becomes absolute, with a discrete no-order as to costs for the variation hearing itself.