Au Wai Yin Amy and Another v. Poon Chung Kwong Peter and Others

Read the full judgment text of CACV 453/2020 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 18 December 2020.

1. After we allowed the appeal on 3 November 2020, we directed for statement of costs and list of objections to be lodged.

Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case

Case No.CACV 453/2020[2020] HKCA 1041
Court
Court of Appeal
Date18 Dec 2020
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACV 453/2020

[2020] HKCA 1041

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 453 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCMP 152/2019)

________________________

  IN THE MATTER OF SUNRISE AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT LIMITED (旭日空調設備有限公司) (COMPANY NO.: 677424)
AND
  IN THE MATTER OF SECTIONS 724 AND 725 OF THE COMPANIES ORDINANCE (CAP. 622)

________________________

BETWEEN    
LAU WAI YIN AMY (劉慧燕) Petitioners
and
PANG SHEUNG YICK (彭商益)
(as the joint administrators of the estate of PUN SHEUNG WAI JOSEPH (彭商偉), (Deceased))
and
POON CHUNG KWONG PETER
(潘重光)
1st Respondent
MESSRS. S. W. TAI & CO. 2nd Respondent
SUNRISE AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT LIMITED
(旭日空調設備有限公司)
3rd Respondent

________________________

Before: Hon Lam VP and Barma JA in Court
Date of Decision on Costs: 18 December 2020

________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

________________________

Hon Lam VP (giving the Decision on Costs of the Court):

1.After we allowed the appeal on 3 November 2020, we directed for statement of costs and list of objections to be lodged.

2.Solicitors for the petitioners lodged 4 statements of costs:

(a)  For CACV 453/2020, seeking a total sum of $98,274;

(b)  For CAMP 68/2020, seeking a total sum of $55,300;

(c)  For the leave application in HCMP 152/2019, seeking a total sum of $124,700; and

(d)  For the petition in HCMP 152/2019, seeking a total sum of $417,545.

3.Solicitors for the 1st Respondent lodged 2 lists of objections, one dealing with the costs in CACV 453/2020 whilst the other one deals with the other proceedings:

(a)  For CACV 453/2020, the total sum proposed by the 1st Respondent is $62,674;

(b) For CAMP 68/2020, the total sum proposed by the 1st Respondent is $33,200;

(c)  For the leave application in HCMP 152/2019, the total sum proposed by the 1st Respondent is $84,200; and

(d) For the petition in HCMP 152/2019, the total sum proposed by the 1st Respondent is $207,745.

4.We shall only give summary assessments for the costs in CACV 453/2020 and CAMP 68/2020 which were proceedings before us.  As for the costs in HCMP 152/2019, as the petition was not interlocutory proceedings, Order 62 Rule 9A of the Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A) is not applicable.  Though similar power can be exercised under Rule 9(4)(b), we are not minded to exercise that power in the present case.  Instead, we would order those costs in HCMP 152/2019 (including the costs for the leave application) be taxed if not agreed.

5.For CACV 453/2020, we do not accept that the time spent and the rates charged by the solicitor on the various items in the statement of costs was excessive.  We fix the costs of the petitioners at $98,274.

6.For CAMP 68/2020, bearing in mind that similar application had already been made in the court below, there is scope of reducing the costs to be allowed to avoid duplication for the costs in the leave application for HCMP 152/2019.  We would fix the costs of the petitioners at $45,000.

(M H Lam)
Vice President
(Aarif Barma)
Justice of Appeal

S W Wong & Associates, for the petitioners

Justin Chow & Co, Solicitors LLP, for the 1st respondent

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under CACV 453/2020