Win Hanverky Ltd. v. Keen Point International Ltd.

HCA017453A/1999

HCA 17453/1999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 17453 OF 1999

____________

____________

Coram: Hon Chung J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 2 April 2001

Date of Judgment: 2 April 2001

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. After a hearing on 17 October 2000, I allowed in part the Defendant's appeal against the Master's final judgment and substituted it with an interlocutory judgment with damages to be assessed.

2. The costs order as drawn up reads:-

"Costs of the Order 14 hearing before Master de Souza be to the Plaintiff, to be taxed if not agreed ...."

3. The Plaintiff now applies to have that costs order amended pursuant to RHC Order 20 rule 11 so that it will read:-

"Costs of the Order 14 summons dated 15 June 2000 (including the costs of the hearing before Master B Kwan on 3 July 2000 and the costs of the hearing before Master de Souza on 12 September 2000, with certificate for counsel)" be to the Plaintiff to be taxed if not agreed.

The Defendant objects to this application on the ground that the relief sought falls outside the ambit of Order 20 rule 11.

4. In determining whether this application does fall outside that rule, an important matter to note is the costs order made by the Master on 12 September 2000. It reads:-

"Costs of this action and this application and the reserved costs on 3 July 2000 be to the Plaintiff, with certificate for counsel."

5. It was not the court's intention, when the costs order of 17 October 2000 was made after the appeal hearing, to deprive the Plaintiff of the benefit of the Master's costs order dated 12 September 2000. With that in mind, the relief sought in this application falls within Order 20 rule 11. Further, the circumstances of the case justify the relief sought.

6. The Defendant also argues that this application has been delayed. It is trite law that lapse of time has nothing to do with an application of this kind: see Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2001, paragraph 20/11/4.

7. By reason of the matters aforesaid, I will make an order in terms of paragraph 1 of the Plaintiff's summons dated 26 March 2001.

Representation:

Mr S Ngo, of Messrs Deacons, for the Plaintiff

Mr Lee Chi Keung, Jim, of Messrs Simon Siu, Wong, Lam & Chan, for the Defendant