Read the full judgment text of FCMC 11141/2013 on BabelCite. This Family Court judgment was delivered on 28 July 2017 before Her Honour Judge Sharon D. Melloy.
Matrimonial Causes – Costs – Indemnity Costs – Discovery – District Court – Preliminary Issues Hearing – Interveners successful in establishing beneficial interest in Factory 5B – Petitioner sought indemnity costs citing poor conduct in discovery and prolonged trial – Court held indemnity costs principles not engaged as no party blameless and no special or unusual features present – Interveners' stance not scandalous, vexatious, malicious, or oppressive – Costs divided into two halves – No order as to costs for first tranche of trial (19-22 April 2016) due to Interveners' late production of audited reports which increased trial length – Costs follow the event thereafter with Petitioner paying Interveners' costs on party and party basis to be taxed if not agreed – Order 62 principles applied – In re Eligindata Ltd (No 2) [1992] 1 WLR 1207 and Town Planning Board v Society for Protection of the Harbour Limited FACV No. 14A of 2003 cited – Discovery chronology highlighted difficulties regarding audited reports and bank statements – Interveners admitted having documents long before trial – Petitioner attempted to broaden scope of trial – Certificate for both counsel granted – District Court Ordinance Cap. 336 s.53 and High Court Ordinance Cap. 4 s.52A referenced – Matrimonial Causes Rules Rule 3 and Rule 91A applicable – R.D.C. Order 62 Rule 28(3) and R.H.C. Order 62 Rule 2(4), 3(3) and 10 considered.
Legal issues: Indemnity costs principles · Costs follow the event
Outcome: No order as to costs for first tranche of trial; Petitioner to pay Interveners' costs on party and party basis thereafter.
Cited by 5 cases · Cites 1 case