Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Entitlement to costs

Legal area

Court

8 Jun 2023

TSE SHAO CHUAN, the Administratrix of the estate of Ho Man Shing, deceased及另一人對 PANG KA YIN

Citation

[2023] HKDC 815
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1237/2022

The defendant's refusal to provide the estate grant and related documents prior to 16 August 2022 was unreasonable given the plaintiffs' plausible beneficiary status; plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw parts of their disclosure application (categories 3 and part of 4), no order as to costs was made for the period before 16 August 2022, and the defendant was awarded costs for the period after 16 August 2022 including costs for the affidavit filed 2 September 2022 assessed at HKD800; plaintiffs' own costs to be determined under legal aid rules.
4 Oct 2019

HKMC MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT LTD v. TSE WING IP AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2391
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP348/2014

The application to vary the costs order nisi was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a material change of circumstances or conduct sufficient to justify disturbing the original costs order; the original order remains in effect.
2 Dec 2008

SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD

Citation

SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2820/2002

Master de Souza found the Plaintiff lacked the true figures and was prejudiced in negotiating the compromise; although evidence did not establish deliberate concealment by OLN, the Plaintiff's disadvantaged position justified reopening Part I of the bill under the authority of Wong Tak-sing; therefore that part of the compromise was set aside and re-taxation and costs of the review were ordered.
9 Sept 2008

LIU CHUNG CHING v. A.S. WATSON GROUP (HK) LTD t/a Park\'n SHOP AND ANOTHER

Citation

LIU CHUNG CHING v. A.S. WATSON GROUP (HK) LTD t/a Park\'n SHOP AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1041/2008

The 2nd Defendant's notice expressly stated the sum was in satisfaction of "all the causes of action in respect of which the Plaintiff claims"; the Plaintiff accepted that payment; therefore under Order 22 r.3(4) all further proceedings in the action are stayed as to both defendants, entitling the Plaintiff to costs up to acceptance under O.62 r.10(2) and requiring the 2nd Defendant to pay the 1st Defendant's wasted costs up to receipt of the Plaintiff's notice of acceptance.
13 May 1997

SIU SAU YUNG v. TAK WING CONTRACTORS LTD. and CHINA EXPAND CONSTRUCTION LTD. and Others

Citation

SIU SAU YUNG v. TAK WING CONTRACTORS LTD. and CHINA EXPAND CONSTRUCTION LTD. and Others
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1139/1996

Payments into court are offers to settle and multiple payments are separate offers; where payments into court exceeded the eventual recovery, the defendants were entitled to their costs from 20 December 1994; the defendants' procedural errors and delays did not amount to serious misconduct sufficient to deprive them of that entitlement; therefore plaintiff receives costs up to 20 December 1994 and defendants receive costs thereafter, including costs of the 13 May 1997 hearing with a counsel certificate, with plaintiff's own costs taxed under Legal Aid Regulations.

Hong Kong Case Law

TSE SHAO CHUAN, the Administratrix of the estate of Ho Man Shing, deceased及另一人 對 PANG KA YIN

HKMC MORTGAGE MANAGEMENT LTD v. TSE WING IP AND OTHERS

SEAN ERIC MCLEAN HOTUNG v. HILLHEAD LTD

LIU CHUNG CHING v. A.S. WATSON GROUP (HK) LTD t/a Park\'n SHOP AND ANOTHER

SIU SAU YUNG v. TAK WING CONTRACTORS LTD. and CHINA EXPAND CONSTRUCTION LTD. and Others

TSE SHAO CHUAN, the Administratrix of the estate of Ho Man Shing, deceased及另一人對 PANG KA YIN