Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Immediate taxation

Legal area

Court

25 Nov 2022

STEADFAST INTERNATIONAL LTD v. TUENBO CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 3578
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2095/2016

The court varied the costs order nisi to require that costs be taxed and paid forthwith if not agreed because the challenged applications were severable and self-contained, Steadfast incurred substantial and provable costs (at least HK$3.5m) justifying separate taxation, delaying payment would cause unfair prejudice given the early stage of the action and the applications were unwarranted and unmeritorious such that immediate payment was an appropriate sanction.
24 Jun 2021

CHAU YUET CHING BRENDA v. CHAN BO MAN WILLIAM AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1797
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA652/2017

The court varied the earlier costs order: costs of the successful striking-out application are to be taxed on an indemnity basis if not agreed and paid forthwith with certificate for two counsel because the counterclaim was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process, the interlocutory costs were severable and substantial, and the CCP's asserted impecuniosity did not outweigh the justice of immediate taxation.
22 Jan 2020

FAIRMILE CONSULTANTS LTD v. ESQUEL ENTERPRISES LTD

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 253
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA251/2019

The court held that after the defendant filed its evidence on 16 May 2019 the factual disputes were plainly unsuitable for summary determination and the plaintiff should not have continued the summary judgment application; accordingly costs incurred after 16 May 2019 are to be paid to the defendant and immediately taxed/paid forthwith, while costs incurred on or before 16 May 2019 remain defendant's costs in the cause.
4 Jul 1994

AKTIESEL SKABET DANSK SKIBSFINANSIERING v. WHEELOCK MARDEN & CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

AKTIESEL SKABET DANSK SKIBSFINANSIERING v. WHEELOCK MARDEN & CO. LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2625/1988

The court held that the normal rule is to order costs in interlocutory proceedings "in any event" and, on the facts, there was no sufficient reason to depart from that rule; accordingly the costs awarded to the defendants are to be in any event and the costs of the present application are to be to the plaintiff in any event.

Hong Kong Case Law

STEADFAST INTERNATIONAL LTD v. TUENBO CO LTD AND OTHERS

CHAU YUET CHING BRENDA v. CHAN BO MAN WILLIAM AND OTHERS

FAIRMILE CONSULTANTS LTD v. ESQUEL ENTERPRISES LTD

AKTIESEL SKABET DANSK SKIBSFINANSIERING v. WHEELOCK MARDEN & CO. LTD. AND OTHERS