Houtai Investment Holdings Ltd v. Leung Yat Tung and Others
Read the full judgment text of HCA 1725/2019 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 23 July 2021.
1. The Plaintiff in this case applied to vary the costs order nisi made in the Decision of this Court handed down on 27 May 2021, when the proceedings against the 4 th Defendant were stayed in favour of arbitration, pursuant to the arbitration clause contained in the agreement between the Plaintiff and the 4 th Defendant. The Plaintiff’s action against the other Defendants was also stayed on these Defendants’ application for a case management stay, since this Court held that the Plaintiff’s clai
Cited by 1 case · Cites 1 case
|
HCA 1725/2019 [2021] HKCFI 2165 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ACTION NO 1725 OF 2019 ________________________ BETWEEN
________________________ Before: Hon Mimmie Chan J in Chambers Dates of Written Submissions: 16, 23 and 24 June 2021 Date of Decision: 23 July 2021 ________________________ D E C I S I O N ________________________ 1.The Plaintiff in this case applied to vary the costs order nisi made in the Decision of this Court handed down on 27 May 2021, when the proceedings against the 4th Defendant were stayed in favour of arbitration, pursuant to the arbitration clause contained in the agreement between the Plaintiff and the 4th Defendant. The Plaintiff’s action against the other Defendants was also stayed on these Defendants’ application for a case management stay, since this Court held that the Plaintiff’s claims against them are dependent and contingent upon the existence of a binding lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the 4th Defendant, and there is overlap in the factual issues for determination in the Plaintiff’s claims against the 4th Defendant and the other Defendants. 2.Having considered the written submissions filed on behalf of the parties, I am prepared, in the exercise of my discretion on costs, to vary the costs order nisi, to the effect that the Plaintiff is to pay the costs of the summons for stay on party and party basis. This is upon consideration given to the fact that there was no arbitration agreement between the Plaintiff and these Defendants, which is one matter relevant to the exercise of the Court’s discretion to order indemnity costs. 3.The costs of the application for variation are in the cause of the action.
Mr Vincent Lam, Mr Kurt Ng and Mr Ben Chan, instructed by Siao, Wen and Leung, for the plaintiff Mr Joseph Wong, instructed by Poon & Cheung, for the 1st to 3rd and 5th to 8th defendants |
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCA 1725/2019