Re Zzh

HCMH 57/2021

[2023] HKCFI 2814

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MENTAL HEALTH CASE NO 57 OF 2021

_______________

_______________

__________________

DECISION

__________________

1.The instant Part II application under the Mental Health Ordinance (Cap. 135) (“MHO”) arose out of the settlement totalling around HK$7.28 million under the Employee Compensation (DCEC 2208/2017) and common law action (HCPI 980/2018).

2.The issue of costs was adjourned pending the skeleton bill.

3.By an order of Master Kot dated 18 May 2021 in HCPI 980/2018, the Defendant in the common law action shall pay the costs of the Part II application, to be taxed if not agreed, on a common fund basis.

4.The solicitors for the Applicant in the Part II application have submitted a skeleton bill of costs (including disbursements) of HK$226,845.34.

5.Miss Kwan, solicitor for the Applicant, had been asked to set out what were the complications over and above the run of the mill Part II application.  It was submitted that:

(1)  The MIP had three marriages: (i) one in the Mainland giving the issues of the two sons; (ii) a second marriage as to which virtually nothing was known; and (iii) a third marriage where there are divorce proceedings.

(2)  The two sons from the first marriage are residing in the Mainland and extra costs were incurred in communication and notarization.

(3)  There have been queries by the Official Solicitors as to the current monthly outgoings of HK$17,000.

(4)  There have been issues with the Official Solicitors as to investment power of the Committee.

6.I am of the view that the overall costs of HK$226,845.34 claimed in a Part II application are too high for the following reasons:

(1)  There should not have been issues as to power of investment as the bulk of the settlement would be held in Court;

(2)  The outgoings of HK$17,000 per month are not excessive and within the normal range and any argument and proof of which should not have been substantial and be kept proportional to the amount involved;

(3)  Fees of one of the two psychiatrists ran up to HK$24,750 which is excessive in the context of a Part II application arising from the ECC and HCPI settlement, as much of the matters traversed therein are no longer relevant, and solicitors acting under Part II of MHO should have acted to secure an expert charging less extravagantly, such as the other psychiatrist charging only HK$6,000.

7.Grant there were elements of relatives outside the jurisdiction and multiple marriages, the costs would be uplifted from the run of the mill care, but rateably reduced to reflect the unnecessity of the matters set out in points 1 to 3 above.

8.Hence, the assessment will be in the sum of HK$120,000 taking into account the common fund basis.  Miss Kwan has given an undertaking that there will be no separate charging on the Applicant beyond the above assessment.

9.The Applicant is legally aided, and subject to para. 7 herein, there be legal aid taxation, if necessary.

10.The decision is open for future reference.

Miss Kwan Hoi Yum of Yu & Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid,for the Applicant