Read the full judgment text of HCCT59/2004 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 12 September 2005 before Master de Souza.
Costs — Calderbank offers — Conditional offers — Affidavit requirement — Costs taxation — Review of hourly rates — Construction and Arbitration Proceedings. The Defendant made several Calderbank offers to settle costs claiming Plaintiff’s failure to accept, but offers conditioned on Plaintiff providing an affidavit confirming charging and payment of claimed hourly rates. The Plaintiff rejected the conditional offers. The Court held the offers to be conditional and thus validly rejected without costs consequences. The Plaintiff’s refusal was not unreasonable as no legal obligation to provide the affidavit existed. Regarding the review of Plaintiff’s solicitors’ hourly rates, evidence including an attendance note and letter from lay clients sufficiently confirmed the correctness of the rates, and the review application was refused. The order nisi for costs of the taxation was made final. The Defendant’s application to vary the costs order nisi was refused. Costs of the application regarding the Calderbank issue were awarded to the receiving party, taxed if not agreed, and no costs order was made on the review application.
Legal issues: Validity and effect of conditional Calderbank offers · Reasonableness of Plaintiff’s refusal of the Calderbank offer and costs consequences · Review of hourly rates of Plaintiff’s solicitors
Outcome: Defendant’s application to vary costs order nisi refused; Plaintiff’s solicitors’ hourly rates review refused; order nisi for costs of taxation made final.
Cites 2 cases