Read the full judgment text of HCCT 81/2001 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 11 February 2003 before Hon Ma JA in Chambers.
Procedure — Costs orders — Summary judgment — Unconditional leave to defend — Costs order nisi — Variation application — Defendant amended Defence shortly before hearing — Defence raised construction and estoppel arguments — Plaintiff’s pursuit of summary judgment reasonable — Costs order nisi reflecting usual practice — Application to vary refused — Costs to be costs in cause. Plaintiff sought summary judgment for $1,166,100; defendant amended Defence three weeks before hearing and was granted unconditional leave to defend, with costs order nisi made. Defendant’s out-of-time application to vary the costs order was dismissed as inappropriate and lacking exceptional justification, the court affirming the general principle that costs are costs in the cause upon unconditional leave to defend. Costs proportionality left to taxation. Application refused and costs order confirmed.
Legal issues: Variation of costs order nisi
Outcome: Application to vary the costs order nisi dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases