Read the full judgment text of HCCT 45/2012 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 8 May 2014 before Hon L Chan J.
Construction and arbitration proceedings — Licensing scheme dispute — Copyright Tribunal application under Section 156(3) of the Copyright Ordinance — Plaintiff sought interim payment or payment into court pending Tribunal decision — Court ordered defendant to pay specified sums into court as security with costs order nisi for plaintiff — Defendant applied to amend order to include plaintiff’s obligation to deliver watermarked copies and to reflect licensing options present in scheme — Court allowed amendments to ensure fairness and consistency with scheme before Tribunal. Defendant also applied to vary costs orders on grounds of plaintiff’s unsuccessful arguments on interim payment and payment into court. Court awarded defendant 80% of hearing costs, ordered defendant to pay 40% of application costs excluding hearing, and awarded defendant 65% of costs of variation summons. Orders reflect proportional success of parties and overlapping preparation. Costs certificates for two counsel granted. The decision clarifies the necessity to expressly include reciprocal obligations in security orders and to align payment security with licensing options under dispute. Costs allocation considers actual conduct and success in interlocutory proceedings, balancing fairness with procedural efficiency.
Legal issues: Amendment of security payment order to include plaintiff’s obligations · Inclusion of licensing options for new KMVs in security payment order · Allocation and variation of costs orders
Outcome: Amendment of the payment into court order to include plaintiff’s obligations and licensing options allowed; varied costs orders made in favor of the defendant for the hearing and application costs; partial cost recovery ordered from the defendant for application excluding hearing.
Cites 1 case