Kelso Enterprises Ltd v. Liu Yiu Keung Stephen and Another

cacv 303/2006

in the high court of the

hong kong special administrative region

court of appeal

civil appeal no. 303 of 2006

(on appeal from HCMP NO. 3302 of 2004)

______________________

BETWEEN

Before: Hon Rogers VP in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 12 March 2007

Date of Decision: 12 March 2007

______________________

D E C I S I O N

______________________

1.This is an application for security of costs in respect of the appeal.  The appeal is in a winding-up matter and it relates to the Judge’s order refusing to defer the date of dissolution of the company.  The grounds of appeal are relatively short.

2.On this application the Respondent to the appeal have first indicated that they consider their costs likely to be $800,000.  They asked for security of $600,000.  When it was made clear by the court in the course of argument that a figure of that amount would not be likely to be ordered by this court, Mr Chan sensibly reduced the amount claimed, or what he said would be reasonable, to $400,000.

3.However, having listened to both sides, the view that I take is the amount of security which I should order is not the actual amount which the parties will choose to pay their counsel and their solicitors but the amount that the case could reasonably be conducted by reasonable and sensible lawyers on both sides.

4.This is going to be a short appeal, from the look of it.  I do not consider it should be a long appeal, it certainly will not be long in this court if I have got anything to do with it.  In my view, the amount put forward by the Appellants, namely about $275,000, which is an increase on their original suggestion of about $200,000, should cover a reasonable senior and junior, not of course the most fashionable, but counsel that can do a reasonable job, and the solicitor’s costs.

5.I propose, therefore, to order a sum of $275,000 costs in the usual form to be paid.

(Submission by counsel)

6.What I think would be a fair order in this case is that the costs of this application, that is today, be the Appellant’s costs in the appeal.

Mr Baker, of Messrs Clyde & Co, for the Applicant/Appellant

Mr Abraham Chan, instructed by Messrs Arculli, Fong & Ng, for the 1st and 2nd Respondents