7 Oct 2022
The court applied a broad brush assessment and found the adjusted costs claimed were necessary, proper and reasonable; it summarily assessed ACC’s costs at HK$271,200 and the Intended 2nd–5th Defendants’ costs at HK$248,110 and made no further costs order.
27 Jun 2022
The court adopted a global approach to assessment, accepted some of the Plaintiff's objections but not to the extent sought, disallowed travelling fees, allowed counsel's fees in full (HK$117,000), and adjusted the solicitor's claimed items to totals of B HK$5,000; C HK$300,000; D1+D2 HK$300,000; D3 HK$10,000; D4 HK$68,000, producing an assessed total of HK$800,000 payable by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.
17 Sept 2021
The court held that the solicitors' and pupil counsel's hourly rates were reasonable but that specified professional work charges and counsel fees were excessive; by summary assessment the recoverable costs (including fees for the application to vary the interim costs order) were fixed at HKD 210,000, payable by the applicant to the respondent.
13 Sept 2018
The court exercised its summary assessment power to fix reasonable costs: it reduced the first defendant's claim from HKD 40,749 to HKD 25,000 and allowed the second defendant HKD 35,000 of the HKD 40,506 claimed, including a HKD 20,000 counsel fee, as the appropriate costs awards.
29 May 2013
On summary assessment the court found many claimed items excessive given the limited scope and involvement of counsel, fixed a notional handling solicitor hourly rate at HK$3,800, reduced individual item claims (B2 to HK$500; C1 and C3 to HK$1,900 each; D1 HK$1,900; D2 HK$2,533; D3 HK$1,267; D4 HK$1,900) and allowed counsel's fee at HK$17,000, resulting in total assessed costs of HK$29,000 payable forthwith by the plaintiff to the defendant.
7 Feb 2012
Given the simplicity of the application and that the hearing was listed for half an hour, the claimed costs were excessive; the court exercised its power under O 62 r 9A to fix a gross sum and awarded $51,201 as an adequate and reasonable sum to be paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.
13 Jan 2012
Applying the party-and-party standard, the Master adjusted rates and disallowed excessive time where not necessary, allowed specified hours for litigation clerk, solicitor communications and professional work and allowed counsel fees in full, resulting in assessment of allowable costs at HK$71,756.00 in favor of the 2nd Defendant.
13 Jan 1984
The judge found that the combination of Axona's insolvency, the existence of a Mareva injunction with frozen assets, the release of a large sum to be used for legal costs and the prima facie excessive charges together constituted special circumstances permitting the bills to be taxed; accordingly an order for taxation was made.