Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Party conduct

  • 9 Sept 2025

    HERAEUS LTD v. CHU KENG MING

    Citation
    [2025] HKCFI 4133
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP1324/2024

    The stay summons was dismissed because the defendant failed to demonstrate a sufficiently arguable appeal on the reserve price (no palpable error in the court's factual valuation findings), and on balance the defendant's conduct in failing to implement an available settlement and in delaying vacant possession outweighed any contention that the appeal would be rendered nugatory; accordingly the court refused to deprive the plaintiff of the fruits of judgment and awarded costs on an indemnity basis.

  • 30 Nov 2021

    BKGGB also known as NGGB v. BKND

    Citation
    [2021] HKFC 243
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC1410/2019

    Having considered the volume and disproportionality of costs, disparity in financial means, documented instances of respondent's delaying tactics, inconsistent positions on relocation, failure to meaningfully challenge the relocation plan at trial, and the respondent's alleged fabrication of a court order (unaddressed by him), the court found exceptional circumstances justifying departure from the usual practice; varied the costs order nisi so respondent contributes 25% of petitioner's costs of and arising out of the relocation application (and related applications), with certificate for coun…

  • 24 Jul 2015

    開聯工業中心業主立案法團 v. 北豐有限公司

    Citation
    開聯工業中心業主立案法團 v. 北豐有限公司
    Court
    Lands Tribunal
    Case number
    LDBM95/2013

    The applicant succeeded in causing the respondent to undertake removal of the unauthorised works and the respondent conducted the litigation and pre-litigation dealings unreasonably and with unsupported or irrelevant defences; these special and unusual features made an award of costs on an indemnity basis appropriate. The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant's costs, to be taxed on indemnity basis at District Court scale with certificate for counsel.

  • 23 Mar 2015

    BOTHLINK LTD v. KING GLARE LTD AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    BOTHLINK LTD v. KING GLARE LTD AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1978/2013

    Application to vary the costs order nisi was dismissed because the original claim exceeded District Court jurisdiction at the time of transfer, the claim against King Glare regarding Temporary and New Structures was not unreasonable on the pleaded facts, alleged delays were minimal and did not justify variation, and the certificate for two counsel was not properly before the application; accordingly King Glare must pay Bothlink's costs of the application to be taxed if not agreed.

  • 18 Jun 2014

    CEP LTD v. 无锡巿佳诚太阳能科技有限公司

    Citation
    CEP LTD v. 无锡巿佳诚太阳能科技有限公司
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCCL12/2012

    The sanctioned payment of HK$1,105 fell within Order 22 r 23; the plaintiff failed to show it would be unjust to apply the default rule; accordingly the defendant's costs incurred after 15 November 2012 are to be taxed on an indemnity basis with enhanced interest at half of 5% above judgment rate from 16 November 2012 until judgment, and overall the plaintiff must pay 70% of the defendant's costs (party and party up to 15 November 2012, indemnity thereafter).

  • 22 Mar 2013

    LIU KEITH CHE MING AND ANOTHER v. POON CHI SING t/a GOOD VIEW ORNAMENT

    Citation
    LIU KEITH CHE MING AND ANOTHER v. POON CHI SING t/a GOOD VIEW ORNAMENT
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ2421/2010

    The judge found the plaintiffs had exaggerated their claim and pursued unnecessary issues that materially prolonged the trial despite settlement overtures and the defendant's efforts to resolve matters; applying Order 62 rule 5 and the principles in Re Elgindata (No 2), the costs nisi was varied to reflect the plaintiffs' conduct: defendant to bear half of the plaintiffs' costs in the claim, plaintiffs to pay 100% of defendant's costs in the counterclaim, and defendant to pay the costs of the costs hearing, all taxed if not agreed with certificate for counsel.

  • 16 Apr 2010

    CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. CHAN CHUN CHUEN AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    CHINACHEM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION LTD v. CHAN CHUN CHUEN AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAP8/2007

    The court ordered the 1st Defendant to pay the Plaintiff's costs on an indemnity basis and to indemnify the estate for costs properly incurred because the judge found, on the facts, that the 1st Defendant knowingly propounded a forged 2006 will and deliberately deceived the court; the Secretary for Justice's costs up to judgment are to be paid out of the estate with the 1st Defendant indemnifying the estate because the Secretary was reasonably joined and his involvement flowed from the 1st Defendant's propounding of the 2006 will; administration pendente lite costs and costs of appointment ar…