Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Joinder for costs

Legal area

Court

10 Oct 2025

RE SUCCESS LANE DEVELOPMENT LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4808
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW3/2025

Service of the Petitioner’s written submissions was validly effected by leaving the documents at Ms Yung’s correspondence address under Order 65 r 5; Ms Yung was the real party and personally benefited from opposing the Petition and conducted unmeritorious litigation; therefore a personal costs order against her was appropriate and the costs were summarily assessed at HK$300,000 (petition) and HK$40,000 (costs proceedings).
27 Dec 2024

BILLION WELL CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD v. LONG FAITH ENGINEERING LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3712
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW32/2022

The summonses were dismissed because the Petitioner unacceptably delayed and failed to warn Chu/Koo of the intended costs application, and on the merits the Petitioner did not establish that Chu/Koo were the real parties who personally benefited or engaged in the requisite serious impropriety causatively linked to costs; additionally costs for conduct after the winding-up could not properly be pursued without addressing statutory procedural constraints (s.186 CWUMPO).
25 Nov 2024

TOP INTEGRATED GROUP LTD v. ZHENGTAN HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3392
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW109/2024

The court exercised its s.52A jurisdiction to join Mr Wong for costs and ordered him to pay the Petitioners' costs of the Companies' opposition to the Continuation Summonses from 27 Feb 2024 and the Discharge Summonses on an indemnity basis because the evidence in the PLs Decision established he was substantially involved and would benefit if the Appointment Orders were set aside; the court further ordered a wasted costs indemnity against KBCC for acting without proper authority, ignoring detailed warnings and failing to obtain or produce counsel advice, such conduct causing wasted costs.
25 Nov 2024

ONE WORLDWIDE GROUP LTD v. SEASIDE HOLDINGS LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3392
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW107/2024

The court exercised its s.52A jurisdiction and ordered Mr Wong joined for costs and liable on an indemnity basis for the Petitioners’ costs of opposing the Continuation Summonses from 27 February 2024 and the Discharge Summonses because evidence showed he was substantially involved and stood to benefit such that justice required liability; the court also ordered a wasted costs indemnity order against KBCC for acting without proper authority, failing to obtain or produce legal advice and causing the Petitioners to incur avoidable costs; costs to be assessed by gross sum assessment.
28 Oct 2024

HJ INNOXCELL LTD v. TEH BOON KHUAN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3058
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1707/2018

On the facts the court found Kwok had steered and funded HJI's litigation while adopting a conscious approach to avoid adverse costs exposure and that HETCL and IIPDL were his funding vehicles; the conduct evidenced questionable bona fides amounting to engagement in risk-free litigation for his purposes so that it was just and reasonable to join them for costs only and make a nisi non-party costs order that they be jointly and severally liable for the defendants' costs (certificate for two counsel) with directions for summary assessment.
28 Oct 2024

HJ INNOXCELL LTD v. TEH BOON KHUAN

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3058
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1402/2020

Court concluded on summary view that Kwok, through HETCL and IIPDL, controlled and funded HJI’s litigation, consciously avoided meeting adverse costs by defaulting on security for costs and by steering litigation while HJI was insolvent, and therefore acted with a mindset that made it just and reasonable to impose personal joint and several liability for defendants’ costs; nisi non‑party costs order granted with timelines for taxation and certificate for two counsel.
28 Oct 2024

HJ INNOXCELL LTD v. NG CHIU KWAN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3058
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2835/2018

The court concluded on the summary materials that Kwok, through his control and funding arrangements (including proofs of debt signed by him/their agents), steered HJI's litigation while consciously avoiding liability for adverse costs (defaulting on ordered security for costs) and demonstrated a mindset of pursuing risk‑free litigation; that conduct rendered him the real party and cast doubt on bona fides such that it was just and reasonable to join Kwok, HETCL and IIPDL for costs and to make a nisi joint and several non‑party costs order against them, with procedural steps for taxation and…
29 Feb 2024

CHIU SUI CHING, the administrator of the estate of LEUNG HO TIN, deceased v. CHENG KWAI HUNG t/a HANG NAGI WORKS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 635
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI939/2017

The court varied the 2023 Nisi Costs Order so that the benefit of the costs under that order belongs to MPC personally rather than to the plaintiff, on the basis that MPC personally incurred the costs of resisting the challenged applications and that indemnity-scale costs were considered only where justified by abuse or other special features (not conclusively granted on available text).
11 Jul 2023

ACHIEVE GOAL HOLDINGS LTD v. ZHONG XIN ORE-MATERIAL HOLDING CO LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1824
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1987/2005

The summons was dismissed because the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success; Mr Zeng had submitted to the court's jurisdiction by attending hearings and was properly served; language complaints were unarguable absent application under the statutory rules; no evidence supported claims of impecuniosity or that retirement absolved liability; delay was minimal; costs were ordered and directed to be summarily assessed.
13 May 2022

WONG CHONG KWAI YIN by her next friend WONG JOANNA YING MEI v. TSANG HAU LING, the executrix of TANG LAN FONG, the deceased AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1367
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA939/2005

Madam Tsang (as executrix) was ordered to pay 85% of Madam Wong’s costs (to be taxed party and party with certificate for two counsel) because she adopted the proceedings, was or should have been legally advised about her exposure and no facts justified departing from the traditional rule. However, third‑party costs orders against Sky Trinity and Yu Xiao Yan under RHC Order 62 r.6A were refused because the summary procedure requires a plain and straightforward case with direct evidence of funding or control and none was shown; the applicant bears the burden to prove funding/control and advers…