Read the full judgment text of HCCT 12/2007 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 24 January 2008 before Deputy High Court Judge L. Chan.
Costs — Ex parte injunction — Material non-disclosure — Costs order nisi — Variation of costs orders — Applications for discharge and re-grant — Costs in arbitration-related injunction proceedings — Stay applications and related costs — Interim payment of costs under O. 62 r. 9A — Costs allocation for procedural hearings and summons — Parties’ success and fault in applications. This case concerns various applications relating to the costs order nisi made upon the discharge of an ex parte injunction granted due to material non-disclosure by the plaintiffs. The core legal issues determined include: the proper variation of costs orders concerning the ex parte hearing, the discharge applications, and the re-grant of part of the injunction; the costs implications of defendants’ applications to stay the re-granted order and the interaction with appeals; whether an interim payment order under O. 62 r. 9A is appropriate in the circumstances involving foreign plaintiffs with no assets in jurisdiction; and allocation of costs for multiple procedural summons and hearings, considering the relative success and fault of the parties. The court varied some parts of the costs order nisi to reflect actual participation and outcomes, refused the defendants’ interim payment application, ordered costs related to the stay application in the cause of the appeal, and apportioned costs for procedural matters. No costs orders were made for a hearing deemed a waste of court time due to faults by all parties.
Legal issues: Variation of costs order nisi on ex parte injunction discharge · Costs order variation upon dismissal of defendants’ application to stay re-granted order · Interim payment of costs application under O. 62 r. 9A · Costs allocation for several procedural summons and hearings
Outcome: Costs order nisi varied according to specifics of appearances and applications; defendants succeed on costs for substantive discharge but pay no costs for ex parte hearing; costs of stay application varied to be in cause of appeal; interim payment application dismissed; costs apportioned for various summons; no costs for wasteful 21 December hearing.
Cited by 6 cases