Mediterranean Shipping Co (HK) Ltd. v. Texway Industries Ltd. and Another

Read the full judgment text of HCA 1220/2002 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 5 November 2002.

1. In this matter, for reasons I set out in my judgment, I restricted the costs orders that might otherwise have been made, limiting the order to costs on the writ. The key date in relation to costs is 23 August. On that date, the defendants, having been informed of the new tenancy, must have had all of their concerns satisfied, that is why the matter ought not to have proceeded beyond that date. Costs ought not to have been an issue because at that date both defendants properly, as they should

Cited by 1 case

Case No.HCA 1220/2002
Court
High Court CFI
Date05 Nov 2002
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCA001220A/2002

HCA1220/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1220 OF 2002

_______________________

BETWEEN
Mediterranean Shipping Co (HK) Ltd Plaintiff
AND
Texway Industries Ltd 1st Defendant

Fujian Group Ltd

2nd Defendant

_______________________

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Saunders in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 5 November 2002

Date of Judgment: 5 November 2002

__________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

1.In this matter, for reasons I set out in my judgment, I restricted the costs orders that might otherwise have been made, limiting the order to costs on the writ. The key date in relation to costs is 23 August. On that date, the defendants, having been informed of the new tenancy, must have had all of their concerns satisfied, that is why the matter ought not to have proceeded beyond that date. Costs ought not to have been an issue because at that date both defendants properly, as they should have, acknowledging liability, ought to have been willing to pay costs to that date, but they did not adopt that position. They came before me and argued that in fact the writ was totally misconceived and that there was no cause of action. In that they failed, and for that reason, summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff against both defendants.

2.Mr Chain has satisfied me that in the context of those facts he, accepting that my concern in respect of costs is a legitimate concern, should still have costs. I am satisfied that he is right. There will be an order for costs against the 1st defendant to 23 August, and against the 2nd defendant to today. That is an order absolute.

(J L Saunders)
Deputy High Court Judge

Representation:

Mr Benjamin Chain, instructed by Johnson, Stokes & Master, for the Plaintiff

Mr Yuen of Chris H M Yuen & Co., for D1 & D2

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCA 1220/2002