Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 52a high court ordinance

Legal area

Court

6 Jun 2025

ANTHONIA LOUISE ZOYA ANTON v. HONG KONG AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING COMPANY LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2445
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI152/2021

P's counsel failed to lodge skeleton submissions and list of authorities in compliance with §12 of PD 5.4 despite having adequate time and materials; that non-compliance constituted an improper and inexcusable dereliction of duty causing the adjournment and consequential wasted costs. On that basis the court exercised its discretion to make a wasted costs order personally against P's counsel, assessing the wasted costs at HK$75,000 payable forthwith; P's solicitors were not held personally liable and P must not be charged for costs arising from the adjournment.
27 Feb 2023

HYDROTECH WATERPROOFING SOLUTIONS LTD v. SHUN YUEN CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 601
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCT44/2020

The court held that McKee and Mo should not be made personally liable because there was no clear evidence of mala fide conduct or that they acted for their own personal benefit rather than for their companies; however Hop Shing Engineering & Construction Co Limited (HS) was properly joined for costs and ordered to pay jointly and severally with the Plaintiff because evidence showed HS funded the litigation, had a profit-sharing arrangement entitling it to recover about HKD 3,000,000 and therefore stood to benefit and was a real party to the litigation. Consequently the Plaintiffs (including H…
16 May 2022

NG HING YAU AND ANOTHER v. KONG ART LTD

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1381
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1367/2016

Given the uncontradicted evidence that Cheung was the sole beneficial owner and sole director who controlled and funded the Defendant's conduct of the litigation and stood to obtain personal financial benefit from the Defendant remaining manager of the Arcade, and given the Defendant's insolvency making recovery from it impracticable, it was in the interests of justice under section 52A HCO and RHC O 62 r 6A to order Cheung personally to pay the Plaintiffs' costs.
29 May 2019

WADDINGTON LTD v. CHAN CHUN HOO THOMAS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2019] HKCA 604
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV466/2018

The court held that (a) the jurisdiction to grant indemnities to a minority shareholder plaintiff and to supervise their operation falls within the court's wide costs jurisdiction under s52A(1) and Order 62 and involves judicial discretion informed by the indemnity principle; (b) such indemnities permit court scrutiny of the plaintiff's costs; and (c) the normal and appropriate basis for taxation of costs under a court-granted indemnity in a derivative action is the indemnity basis (Order 62 Rule 28(4A)), not the common fund basis, absent special circumstances. The Court therefore substituted…
6 Jul 2018

WADDINGTON LTD v. CHAN CHUN HOO THOMAS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1546
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3291/2003

Leave refused because the Plaintiff's proposed grounds of appeal do not demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success and there is no other reason in the interests of justice to hear the appeals; the court properly exercised discretion to refuse further disclosure (to avoid collateral/satellite litigation and because disclosure against paying companies sufficed for preservation) and correctly resolved the taxation/indemnity issues as set out in its prior written decisions.
26 Apr 2018

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI ENTERPRISE CO LTD

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 899
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA886/2007

Mr Lee was the real party to the litigation: he owned and controlled BIC, funded and managed the actions, stood to benefit, and caused BIC to pursue false claims supported by fabricated and dishonest evidence; the evidence from the underlying proceedings was admissible against him; although there was gross delay and lack of warning by the applicants, no actual prejudice to Mr Lee was shown; in the interests of justice the court ordered under s52A HCO that Mr Lee personally bear the taxed costs (with interest) and made a nisi order as to basis of costs.
26 Apr 2018

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 899
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1957/2005

The judge found on admissible evidence from the underlying proceedings that Mr Lee was the real party — sole or controlling owner of BIC, the funder and controller of the litigation, who would benefit from its success and who caused and pursued claims supported by fabricated and dishonest evidence — and that despite delay and lack of warning there was no real prejudice; therefore in the interests of justice Mr Lee must personally bear the taxed costs (with interest) of the Wu Yi Parties, with HCA 714/2007 costs on indemnity and the others on party-and-party basis.
29 Jul 2016

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI ENTERPRISE CO LTD

Citation

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI ENTERPRISE CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA886/2007

It was not plain and obvious that the joinder applications were an abuse of process; therefore Mr Lee is joined as a party to HCA 1957/2005, HCA 714/2007 and HCA 886/2007 for the purpose of costs under s52A and Order 62 r6A, but the Court of First Instance lacks jurisdiction to make a non-party costs order in respect of costs incurred in proceedings before the Court of Appeal, so the application relating to the Appeals is dismissed; directions were given for pleadings and costs on a nisi basis pending the second-stage hearing.
29 Jul 2016

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD v. WU YI DEVELOPMENT CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1957/2005

At the first-stage the court concluded it was not plain and obvious that the joinder applications were an abuse of process despite delay, lack of prior warning and some prejudice; therefore Mr Lee was to be joined to the three High Court actions for the purpose of considering non-party costs orders, but the CFI lacks jurisdiction to make non-party costs orders in respect of costs incurred in proceedings before the Court of Appeal, so joinder in relation to the Appeals was dismissed.
29 Jul 2016

WU YI DEVELOPMENT CO LTD v. BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD

Citation

WU YI DEVELOPMENT CO LTD v. BIG ISLAND CONSTRUCTION (HK) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA714/2007

It was not plain and obvious that the joinder applications were an abuse of process; therefore Mr Lee is to be joined at the first stage as a party to the three High Court actions for the purpose of costs so he may be heard on the substantive non-party costs applications, but the CFI lacks jurisdiction to make non-party costs orders in respect of proceedings before the Court of Appeal and those applications are dismissed.