Read the full judgment text of HCCT000071/1997 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 24 June 1998 before The Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Procedure — Security for costs — Companies Ordinance s.357 and Order 23, Rule 1 — Defendant alleged to be nominal plaintiff and potentially unable to pay costs — Deposit paid not sufficient to cover damages and costs if third party succeeds — Discretion to order security exercised despite defendant's bona fides and claim strength assertions — Application timely made five months before trial. Procedure — Failure to comply with court orders regarding provisional expert reports — Defendant delayed serving reports — Court ordered service by fixed date with sanction of expert evidence debarment — Costs ordered nisi for third party. The third party's application for security for costs was granted at 75% of claimed costs, amounting to $4 million. The defendant was ordered to pay this into court within 28 days or risk stay and removal of lis pendens. The defendant was further ordered to comply with deadlines on expert reports to avoid debarment from expert evidence. Costs orders nisi were made on both applications.
Legal issues: Security for costs under Order 23 and section 357 Companies Ordinance · Compliance with court orders regarding provisional expert's report
Outcome: Order made requiring the defendant to pay $4 million as security for costs within 28 days; conditional stay and vacation of lis pendens on failure; order for defendant to serve provisional expert's claim-related reports by 15 July 1998 or be debarred from expert evidence; costs orders nisi in favour of third party in both applications.