Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Assessment of costs

Legal area

Court

8 May 2026

LI XIAO YI v. TANG CHUNG WAH (also known as ALAN CHUNG WAH TANG)

Citation

[2026] HKCA 912
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP35/2026

Leave to appeal was refused because the intended grounds (apparent and actual bias) had no reasonable prospect of success: the judge correctly applied legal principles, the criticisms were supported or unchallenged, matters relied on did not show a closed mind or partiality, actual bias was not properly raised below and is not reasonably arguable, referral to the Official Receiver was proportionate, and there is no other reason in the interests of justice to hear the appeal.
17 Apr 2026

孫麗鶯對香港汽車保險局

Citation

[2026] HKCA 737
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV328/2024

The Court dismissed the applicant’s repeat applications as having no legal basis and being an abuse of process and a waste of court resources; consequently the applications for leave to appeal and for a stay of execution were refused and the applicant ordered to pay the respondent’s costs on an indemnity basis assessed at HK$35,000.
17 Mar 2026

何漢標對陳靜芬高等法院原訟法庭法官

Citation

[2026] HKCA 362
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV499/2024

The application to admit the psychiatric report was refused because the applicant failed to show it could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained before the permission application (failing Ladd v Marshall limb 1) and failed to demonstrate the report would have had a material effect on the permission decision (failing limb 2); although the report was prima facie credible (limb 3 satisfied), there were no wholly exceptional circumstances or public interest to justify exercising the discretionary power to admit the evidence. The court therefore vacated the originating summonses for the…
26 Feb 2026

DEUTSCHE BANK AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT ALSO KNOWN AS DEUTSCHE BANK AG ACTING THROUGH ITS SINGAPORE BRANCH v. LAM YEE CHUN

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 910
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2072/2024

Certificates for two counsel were granted because the complications and consequences justified two counsel; Mr Lam’s application to reduce solicitor-and-own-client costs failed because the guarantee provided for such costs and his conduct (including lack of credibility) warranted the award; Orient Profit’s attempt to cap its costs liability to mortgage proceeds failed because contractual terms cannot fetter the court’s discretion and would create moral hazard; costs are to follow the event and be taxed and assessed by the master in the usual way, with no summary assessment of the variation ap…
13 Feb 2026

MAXCOLM FINANCE LTD v. CHAU TIN YAM AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 166
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP5717/2025

Service and notice requirements were validly satisfied; the plaintiff proved default and produced original loan and mortgage documents establishing an entitlement to a monetary judgment of $576,109.14; the mortgage entitles the plaintiff to possession; partition of the property is impracticable and sale under the Partition Ordinance is appropriate; accordingly the originating summons succeeds and judgment, possession and sale orders are granted with costs against the 1st defendant.
22 Sept 2025

WONG CHING YI (suing by her lawful attorney COLIN WONG) v. YUEN KWOK HEI

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4326
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2115/2024

The court held that the defendant was entitled to recover costs for attendance on Scottish lawyers and for engaging counsel in relation to the Notice of Appeal, found the claim of 1.3 hours preparation reasonable, rejected the plaintiff's objection to the engagement of two solicitors where only one fee earner per task was claimed, and summarily assessed the plaintiff's liability for costs at HK$50,000.
22 Aug 2025

IP KIT LEUNG v. CHAN SZE LAM trading as WANG CHUN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1448
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI732/2022

The judge found on the evidence that the plaintiff knowingly advanced false and dishonest pleadings (the SoC contradicted his sworn oral evidence) and therefore indemnity costs were appropriate as a penal and deterrent measure; the summons to vary the Order Nisi was dismissed and the Order Nisi for indemnity costs was made absolute, with specified costs awarded to the defendant.
31 Jul 2025

梁中平對易庭暉陳偉健律師事務所、譚壹東及另二人

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3302
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1254/2024

Because the plaintiff did not apply to vary the interim costs order and filed no response on quantum, and because the four consolidated matters had the same factual background and a very short hearing, the court summarily assessed costs: Department of Justice HK$15,000 per case and 易庭暉陳偉健律師事務所 (and the parties it represents) HK$20,000 per case, payable immediately by the plaintiff.
31 Jul 2025

梁中平對張世文蔡敏律師事務所

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3300
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP835/2023

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.
- Assessment of costs
- Party-and-party costs
30 Jul 2025

NG YIU CHI ELEANOR v. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCA 680
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV117/2024

The appeal was dismissed and the Plaintiff was ordered to pay the 2nd Defendant's costs on an indemnity basis; on summary assessment using a broad brush approach the court fixed those costs at HK$344,000, rejecting the Plaintiff's lower figure and reducing the 2nd Defendant's claim from HK$382,200 to HK$344,000.