Read the full judgment text of HCCT21/1999 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 21 February 2001 before Hon Burrell J in Chambers.
Security for costs — Construction dispute — Plaintiff small Hong Kong company vs large foreign defendant — Plaintiff claims underpayment; defendant claims overpayment — Security for costs application under s.357 Companies Ordinance and Order 23, rule 1. The defendant contended the plaintiff might be unable to pay costs if unsuccessful given low capital, limited assets, and weak prospects. The court considered established principles under leading authorities, balancing the risk of stifling a genuine claim against defendant's interest in costs recovery. The plaintiff demonstrated bona fides and prospects of success, supported by documentary evidence and prior rulings in its favour, including a dismissal of the defendant’s striking out application and a stay of the defendant’s similar claim. The defendant’s late and oppressive application lacked sufficient evidence that the plaintiff would be unable to pay costs. The application was dismissed, with costs to the plaintiff.
Legal issues: Security for costs application under s.357 Companies Ordinance
Outcome: Application for security for costs dismissed; costs awarded to the plaintiff