Dbs Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd v. Yap Boh Gee and Another

Case No.HCA 2590/2007
Court
High Court CFI
Date17 Dec 2008
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCA 2590/2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO.2590 OF 2007

---------------------

BETWEEN

  DBS BANK (HONG KONG) LIMITED Plaintiff
  (formerly known as DAO HENG BANK LIMITED)  
  and  
  YAP BOH GEE 1st Defendant
  TSE YUK KAU AMY 2nd Defendant
  also known as AMY YUK KAU YAP  

----------------------

Before: Hon Poon J in Chambers

Date of Written Submissions on Costs: 9 December 2008

Date of Decision on Costs: 17 December 2008

-------------------------------------

DECISION ON COSTS

-----------------------------------

1.In the decision handed down on 18 November 2008, I dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal, set aside the master’s order dated 24 September 2008 and gave the defendants unconditional leave to defend the entire claim.

2.This is my decision on costs.

3.I have already considered the parties’ submissions with care.

4.In my view, the master was entirely justified when he entered partial judgment on HK$106,500 and gave the defendants unconditional leave to defend on the remainder of the claim when the matter came before him.  I will not disturb his costs order.

5.The appeal took the form of rehearing.  By the time of the hearing of the appeal, the defendants had filed their defence in which the point of laches was raised for the first time.  I took that into account and gave them unconditional leave to defend on that basis.  Like any other case where the defendant is granted unconditional leave to defend, costs of the appeal should be in the cause.  (See also Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2008, Vol. 1, para. 14/7/18 of p. 212.)  And I so order, which will also include the costs on the submissions on costs.

  (J. Poon)
  Judge of the Court of First Instance
  High Court

Mr Mike Lui, instructed by Messrs Siao, Wen & Leung, for the Plaintiff

Mr Willard Li, instructed by Messrs Simon S.M. Kwok & Co., for the Defendants

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCA 2590/2007