曾婉玲 v. 兆隆苑業主立案法團
Read the full judgment text of on BabelCite. was delivered on 11 October 2001.
1. Having considered the written submissions on costs by the parties (contained in a letter dated 25th September 2001 from Messrs. Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners and a letter dated 26th September 2001 from Messrs. Ho & Tam), I hold that it was reasonable for the Applicant to proceed with the application up to 26th June 2001 in the absence of any concessions from the Respondent. I further hold that it was reasonable for the Applicant to engage lawyer after she learnt of the engagement of lawyer by the R
Cites 1 case
|
LDBM000199A/2001 IN THE LANDS TRIBUNAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Building Management Application No. LDBM 199 of 2001 _________________
Coram: H.H. Judge LAM Dates of Hearing: 26 June 2001 & 29 August 2001 Date of Ruling: 11 October 2001 __________________ RULING ON COSTS __________________ 1. Having considered the written submissions on costs by the parties (contained in a letter dated 25th September 2001 from Messrs. Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners and a letter dated 26th September 2001 from Messrs. Ho & Tam), I hold that it was reasonable for the Applicant to proceed with the application up to 26th June 2001 in the absence of any concessions from the Respondent. I further hold that it was reasonable for the Applicant to engage lawyer after she learnt of the engagement of lawyer by the Respondent. Even before the engagement of lawyer, the Applicant did incur costs. Further, in the absence of any concessions from the Respondent, she faced the risk of not succeeding in her application and being ordered to pay the costs of the Respondent. For these reasons, my costs order nisi of 18th September 2001 is made absolute.
Representation: Mr. P.M. HO of M/S Ho & Tam, for the applicant Mr. Albert HO of M/S Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners, for the respondent |
Cases cited in this judgment