Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Hourly rates for solicitors

Legal area

Court

23 Jan 2024

林進傑對申訴專員

Citation

[2024] HKCA 54
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV473/2022

The court refused the applicant's request for an oral costs assessment and applied the party-and-party standard by written (summary) assessment, fixed appropriate hourly rates (HK$5,600 for the senior solicitor; HK$3,200 for the junior solicitor), disallowed multiple charges for the same single item, adjusted several items downward because of overlap with work done at first instance, reduced counsel's fee to HK$70,000 and assessed total recoverable costs at HK$93,000 payable by the applicant to the respondent.
16 Jan 2018

HKSAR v. LI CHUN TING

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 55
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA311/2007

Apply the common fund basis to criminal taxation but use the Law Society's agreed hourly rates (Consolidation Circular updated April 2008) as the reference table with flexibility; receiving party may apply for higher rates but must state and justify them in the bill; government counsel are taxed on the same basis as private practitioners and seniority/experience determine appropriate rates.
21 Apr 2017

TYM AND OTHERS v. WSP, the Intended Executrix of the estate of LM, deceased AND ANOTHER

Citation

TYM AND OTHERS v. WSP, the Intended Executrix of the estate of LM, deceased AND ANOTHER
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMP309/2014

The court exercised its discretion to summarily assess the 1st Respondent's Statement of Costs, fixed hourly rates for fee earners (BA $2,600/hr; GL $1,500/hr; LC $600/hr), allowed specified disbursements and counsel fees, and allowed the Statement of Costs in the total sum of $88,572.9 to be paid by the Applicants to the 1st Respondent pursuant to the order dated 19 December 2016.
29 Oct 2015

SLA nee S v. HKL

Citation

SLA nee S v. HKL
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC7500/2010

Although overseas experience may be considered, after assessing the nature and timing of Ms Allison's overseas and local experience the correct categorisation for taxation was two to four years' practice and the appropriate rate is HK$1,650 per hour; the learned master's allowance was not wrong and the application to review was dismissed.
29 Jul 2011

RE DAVID JOHN KENNEDY AND OTHERS

Citation

RE DAVID JOHN KENNEDY AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV33/2008

The taxing master properly exercised discretion: indemnity basis gives the receiving party the benefit of doubt but does not permit recovery of costs which are unreasonably incurred or unreasonably excessive. The 1997 guideline rates remain a relevant starting point; rates and time claims were adjusted item by item by reference to role, seniority, actual work done, and case features. Specific increases were allowed in limited respects (e.g. partner Wadham's rate raised to HK$4,500; Johnson's rate marginally increased for FACV), certain counsel fees allowed in full (junior counsel and London s…
23 Jul 2010

S. T. INTERNATIONAL CO LTD v. GENERAL NICE RESOURCES (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

S. T. INTERNATIONAL CO LTD v. GENERAL NICE RESOURCES (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4192/2007

Applying the broad‑brush summary assessment while having regard to the Schedule 1 factors, the court deducted the counsel refresher of HK$12,000, reduced the solicitors' claimed hours to 60% (reductions of HK$54,600 and HK$26,400 respectively) totalling HK$93,000 in deductions, held the hourly rates of HK$2,600 and HK$1,650 reasonable, added a District Court taxation hearing cost of HK$1,500, and assessed costs payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff at HK$197,500 payable within 14 days.
28 Feb 2008

DAVID KONG v. PINE GROWTH MANUFACTURING CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

DAVID KONG v. PINE GROWTH MANUFACTURING CO LTD AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW321/2006

The Master refused to alter his taxation: he concluded the partner's and junior solicitor's hourly rates were justified by experience and complexity, counsel involvement met the necessary or proper test and was not shown to be excessive, and the challenged research items had been correctly assessed on a global basis; therefore the review of taxation was dismissed and original taxation allowances stood.
28 Feb 2008

DAVID KONG v. PINE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND AOTHER

Citation

DAVID KONG v. PINE DEVELOPMENT LTD AND AOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW322/2006

The Master refused to vary his taxation decisions: he affirmed the allowed hourly rates ($4,000 for the partner, $2,500 for the junior solicitor in limited recoverable instances), upheld the allowance of counsel fees as falling within the necessary or proper test and not shown to be excessive, and dismissed the review, awarding costs of the two reviews to the Respondents to pay the Applicant and directing summary assessment by the Master.
19 Apr 1980

KAW TSOI v. LO TO

Citation

KAW TSOI v. LO TO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1295/1975

The Court affirmed the Registrar's taxation decisions in respect of hourly rates, allowed hours, disallowance of a third counsel and allowance of certain brief fees, finding no misdirection or improper exercise of discretion, but remitted the specific item relating to Mr. Mills‑Owens' refreshers (Item 1680(a)) to the Registrar for reconsideration under the correct principles governing refreshers and interviews with the judge.
19 Apr 1980

LO TO v. LAW CHEUNG SHUI CHUN AND OTHERS

Citation

LO TO v. LAW CHEUNG SHUI CHUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA614/1978

The Court held that the Registrar had not acted improperly in the exercise of his taxation discretion and therefore his reductions and allowances were affirmed except for one item (refreshers for Mr. Richard Mills‑Owens) which lacked clear basis and must be reconsidered by the Registrar; interference is justified only where serious error is shown.