3 Mar 2023
After reviewing materials and recognizing duplication with Part 2, the court reduced the Part 3 total from $922,783 to $600,000 and applied the previously ordered two‑thirds proportion, resulting in an award of $400,000 payable by the plaintiffs to the 2nd defendant.
20 Mar 2019
Offers marked or treated as without prejudice or which could and should have been converted into a sanctioned payment could not be relied upon for costs; the sanctioned payment of HKD50,000 made 29 Oct 2014 was valid and refusal produced adverse costs consequences from 26 Nov 2014; accordingly costs incurred by the 2nd plaintiff from 26 Nov 2014 are payable by the defendant on an indemnity basis, interest at 2% above judgment rate, certificate for one counsel only; defendant’s summons dismissed for lack of substantiating evidence.
20 Apr 2007
The Vendor failed to discharge the burden of proving exceptional circumstances to displace the general rule that costs follow the event; the Purchaser succeeded on its construction that practical completion was a condition precedent and that practical completion required completion free from patent defects, entitling the Purchaser to costs here and in both courts below with a certificate for four counsel throughout.
5 Dec 2003
Given the court's broad discretion under Order 62, rule 28 and the compensatory nature of costs, the judge held that the applicant's status as a charitable organisation, the public‑interest character and general importance of the legal issue, and the disparity of resources justified ordering costs to be taxed on an indemnity basis; the indemnity order is to indemnify not to punish and supports recovery of reasonable counsel fees including three counsel where justified.