Read the full judgment text of HCCT 6/2021 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 27 October 2021 before Hon Mimmie Chan J.
Costs — Stay of proceedings — Arbitration agreement — Costs order nisi — Variation of costs order — Whether indemnity basis costs appropriate — Case management stay involving a party without arbitration agreement — Late provision of undertaking — Section 20 of the Ordinance — Application for stay of action to arbitration. The Plaintiff commenced proceedings against the 1st and 2nd Defendants. The 2nd Defendant applied for a stay based on an arbitration agreement in its Contract with the Plaintiff, and also for a case management stay regarding claims against the 1st Defendant, which has no arbitration clause. The 1st Defendant provided a late undertaking to abide by any arbitral award related to the 2nd Defendant's liability. Costs order nisi initially made in favour of the 2nd Defendant. The Plaintiff applied to vary costs order to no order, while 2nd Defendant sought indemnity costs. The Court held that indemnity costs were not justified given the absence of arbitration agreement with the 1st Defendant and late undertaking, and as much evidence filed was unnecessary. The order was varied to allow 2nd Defendant 50% of costs of the Summons, with the balance in the cause. Costs for variation applications follow this order.
Legal issues: Costs order variation for stay application
Outcome: Order nisi varied to allow 2nd Defendant 50% of costs of and incidental to the Summons, balance in the cause; costs of applications for variation follow this order.
Cited by 3 cases