23 Sept 2024
竹林明堂有限公司 對 陳祺豐
- Citation
- [2024] HKCFI 2547
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA142/2016
The appeals are dismissed because the 2015/2016 retainers are irrelevant to the costs assessment, an implied retainer would bind the plaintiff to pay reasonable fees even if the 2017 written retainer were invalid, and a Protective Costs Order is inappropriate because the proceedings do not engage public interest; accordingly the defendant must pay the plaintiff's costs of the appeals and the plaintiff's claimed costs are to be assessed by summary procedure.