Wu Nai Sang v. Fellowship Engineering Ltd and Others

Read the full judgment text of CACV 199/2016 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 30 January 2019.

1. On 12 December 2018, we allowed the applicant’s appeal and made an order that the 1 st and 4 th respondents (both in liquidation) are to pay the applicant’s costs of the appeal, to be assessed summarily, and that the applicant’s own costs are to be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations.

Cited by 1 case

Case No.CACV 199/2016[2019] HKCA 128
Court
Court of Appeal
Date30 Jan 2019
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACV 199/2016

[2019] HKCA 128

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 199 OF 2016

(ON APPEAL FROM DCEC NO 243 OF 2011)

________________________

BETWEEN

  WU NAI SANG Applicant
  and  
  FELLOWSHIP ENGINEERING LIMITED 1st Respondent
  LI KIN MING VINCENT trading as
WIN LI CONSULTING ENGINEERS
2nd Respondent
  陳炳萬 3rd Respondent
  WINLI CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED 4th Respondent

________________________

Before: Hon Cheung JA, Yuen JA and Kwan JA
Date of Decision on Costs: 30 January 2019

________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

________________________

Hon Kwan JA (giving the Decision on Costs of the Court):

1.On 12 December 2018, we allowed the applicant’s appeal and made an order that the 1st and 4th respondents (both in liquidation) are to pay the applicant’s costs of the appeal, to be assessed summarily, and that the applicant’s own costs are to be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations.

2.The applicant submitted a statement of costs for summary assessment dated 11 December 2018 in the total sum of $192,615.

3.The liquidators for the 4th respondent responded on 18 January 2019 stating that they have no objection to the applicant’s statement of costs.  The liquidators for the 1st respondent responded on 22 January stating that they have “no objection for the costs of this appeal to be summarily assessed”, but made no response to the amount of costs claimed in the statement of costs.

4.This is a straightforward appeal.  We consider the costs claimed by the applicant to be excessive, both in respect of the solicitors’ costs and counsel’s fees.  We assess the reasonable costs to be recovered from the 1st and 4th respondents at $146,115.

(Peter Cheung) (Maria Yuen) (Susan Kwan)
Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal

Mr Dennis Law, instructed by K Y Woo & Co, for the Applicant (Appellant)

The 1st Respondent was not represented

The 4th Respondent was not represented

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under CACV 199/2016