Read the full judgment text of HCPI 000063/2001 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 24 June 2003 before Seagroatt, J..
Civil practice – costs – scale of costs – personal injuries action commenced in High Court – settlement sum within District Court jurisdiction – whether plaintiff entitled to High Court scale costs – District Court Ordinance s.32 – whether Employee's Compensation and contributory negligence reduce the value of the claim for forum purposes – District Court Ordinance s.32(2)(b) and s.32(2)(c) – whether s.44A(6) applies to non-transferred cases – test of reasonable prospect of recovery in excess of District Court jurisdiction – Hopkins v Rees & Kirby Ltd (1959) 2 All ER 352 adopted in Hong Kong – Court of Appeal decision in Lee Wah Man Weaving Factory v Hau Lap Co Ltd CACV 48/1984 considered – Mortimer, J. in Chui Ding Tse v Ho Kwong Hung (1987) No. A1347 followed – distinction between current s.44A(6) and former free-standing s.43(2) – cases under former s.43(2) (Lui Po Keung v Tam Kwok Hung (1985) 1 HKC 224) of limited assistance – Employee's Compensation actually paid must be deducted; contributory negligence only deducted if admitted in Statement of Claim – counsel's or solicitors' estimates of contributory negligence irrelevant – consent order for costs to be taxed carries no inference as to scale of costs – no estoppel precluding defendants from contesting scale – plaintiff's solicitors should have asked trial Recorder to determine scale – proper course in future: prompt application to Master by Summons, joint letter to court, or request to trial judge – in present case, value of claim on full liability above District Court limit; even after deducting $229,158 Employee's Compensation, remained above $600,000 – plaintiff justified in bringing and continuing High Court proceedings – settlement sum $510,000 plus $229,158 Employee's Compensation – hearing before judge in chambers six months after Consent Order occasioned by plaintiff's solicitors' omission – no order as to costs of present hearing – plaintiff's solicitors to bear those costs and not pass them on to plaintiff.
Legal issues: Scale of costs where High Court action settles within District Court jurisdiction · Deduction of Employee's Compensation and contributory negligence under s.32(2) DCO · Application of s.44A(6) DCO to non-transferred cases · Construction of the Consent Order and estoppel as to scale of costs
Outcome: The court provided guidance on the proper approach to scale of costs, holding that the value of the claim (above the District Court limit on full liability, even after deducting Employee's Compensation) justified High Court scale costs. On the costs of the present hearing, no order as to costs was made.
Cited by 12 cases