Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Variation of costs nisi

Legal area

Court

22 Nov 2024

LAM MUI as the lawful administratrix of the estate of WONG SHING, deceased AND ANOTHER v. FRONTRICH INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3367
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA34/2021

P2's deliberate concealment of P1's death, dishonest explanations, inordinate delay and opportunistic/persistent litigation conduct constituted special and unusual features and abusive conduct warranting indemnity costs; the 2024 Summons is dismissed with indemnity costs and the Defendants' costs of resisting the Injunction Application incurred after 15 May 2021 are to be borne by P2 on an indemnity basis; the screenshots relied on by P2 are inadmissible without leave.
1 Mar 2021

GILBERT HENRY COLLINS v. ALAN LAM, YAM & PE (A FIRM)

Citation

[2021] HKDC 157
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1555/2019

The court varied the costs order nisi because the plaintiff unreasonably raised and pursued the Collateral Application in a manner that wasted court resources and contradicted his own pleadings, so that justice required the defendant to recover the costs of the remainder of the O 14A Summons with certificate for counsel to be summarily assessed on paper; the plaintiff's conduct and the objectives of the rules justified the adverse costs order.
11 Sept 2020

TSANG WOON MING v. LAI KA LIM also known as LAI KAI LIM AND OTHERS

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2404
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCW407/2016

The costs order nisi in respect of the Petition was varied because the Respondents' numerous failed counter‑allegations substantially inflated the costs of the Petition; having considered overlap with other actions and applied a broad‑brush adjustment, the court ordered Tsang to pay 75% of the Respondents' costs of the Petition, to be taxed if not agreed, and awarded the costs of the present application to Tsang.
24 Jul 2014

AGEAS INSURANCE CO (ASIA) LTD v. LAM HAU WAH INNEO

Citation

AGEAS INSURANCE CO (ASIA) LTD v. LAM HAU WAH INNEO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1840/2009

The court varied the order nisi and ordered the defendant to pay 95% of the plaintiff's costs because only up to 5% of the costs were attributable to issues unnecessarily raised by the plaintiff and the plaintiff's application for summary judgment was not unreasonable.
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.
22 May 2012

CY FOUNDATION GROUP LTD v. CHENG CHEE TOCK THEODORE AND OTHERS

Citation

CY FOUNDATION GROUP LTD v. CHENG CHEE TOCK THEODORE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP680/2011

Funds paid into an overdrawn bank account cannot be traced so no proprietary right capable of protection existed; therefore the injunction application failed and costs follow the event. There were no special circumstances to justify varying the costs nisi or apportioning costs differently.
27 Oct 2006

CHIN SO HANG v. LEE CHEE KIN

Citation

CHIN SO HANG v. LEE CHEE KIN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3371/2003

The court refused to vary the costs order because the plaintiff could not unilaterally treat the agreement as non‑chargeable before a court ruling or adjudication by the Stamp Duty Office; failure to have the instrument stamped or adjudicated prior to the hearing justified awarding costs to the defendant for the preliminary issue, in line with the cited authority.

Hong Kong Case Law

LAM MUI as the lawful administratrix of the estate of WONG SHING, deceased AND ANOTHER v. FRONTRICH INVESTMENTS LTD AND OTHERS

GILBERT HENRY COLLINS v. ALAN LAM, YAM & PE (A FIRM)

TSANG WOON MING v. LAI KA LIM also known as LAI KAI LIM AND OTHERS

AGEAS INSURANCE CO (ASIA) LTD v. LAM HAU WAH INNEO

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

CY FOUNDATION GROUP LTD v. CHENG CHEE TOCK THEODORE AND OTHERS

CHIN SO HANG v. LEE CHEE KIN