Sze Ka Shuen v. Lee Mei Lin and Others

cacv 57 & 58/2008

CACV 57/2008

in the high court of the

hong kong special administrative region

court of appeal

civil appeal no. 57 of 2008

(on appeal from HCA NO. 2016 of 2005)

________________________

BETWEEN

CACV 58/2008

in the high court of the

hong kong special administrative region

court of appeal

civil appeal no. 58 of 2008

(on appeal from HCMP NO. 2201 of 2005)

________________________

BETWEEN

(Heard together pursuant to the directions of
Master de Souza dated 2 April 2008)

Before: Hon Rogers VP in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 28 July 2008

Date of Decision: 28 July 2008

D E C I S I O N

1.I think this is a suitable case for security for costs on the basis that it would appear that the Appellant is impecunious, or, at the very least, the Respondents are going to have great difficulty in recovering their costs.

2.In my normal, not particularly generous, approach to security for costs, I look upon it on the basis of the amount the Respondents could employ suitable counsel to handle this case.

3.In my view, 300,000 all in is enough.  The sum that they have asked for of over $1,100,000, in my view, is far too much for any security for costs in this case.

4.I propose to order security in the standard form, and that is that the Plaintiff do on or before 8 September 2008 give security to answer costs in case any shall be awarded to be paid by the Plaintiff to the 2nd and 3rd Defendants by making lodgement in court of the sum of $300,000 by cash or banker’s draft or by the provision of a bank guarantee of the like amount, which guarantee shall have been approved by the Registrar, and until such lodgement be made and notice thereof given to the Registrar and to the solicitors for the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, such notice to be given on the same day as lodgement is made, all proceedings in the said appeal are to be stayed.

5.In default of the Plaintiff making such lodgement as aforesaid within the time specified above or within such further time as the court may for special reasons allow, the said appeal do, upon the solicitors for the 2nd and 3rd Defendants certifying such default to the Registrar, stand dismissed out of this court without further order.

6.In the event that the appeal is dismissed in the circumstances provided for above, the Plaintiff do pay to the 2nd and 3rd Defendants their costs occasioned by the said appeal, such costs to be taxed, and the costs of this application be costs in the appeal.

Ms Sylvia Siu, of Messrs Sit, Fung, Kwong & Shum, for the Plaintiff in CACV57/2008 and the Petitioner in CACV58/2008/Appellant

Mr William Wong, instructed by Messrs Leung, Tam & Wong, for the 2nd and 3rd Defendants in CACV57/2008 and the 3rd and 4th Respondents in CACV58/2008/Respondents