Chung Yuen Yee v. Sam Woo Bore Pile Foundation Ltd and Others

Read the full judgment text of CACV 145/2010 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 15 September 2011.

1. I agree with the decision of Cheung JA.

Cites 1 case

Case No.CACV 145/2010
Court
Court of Appeal
Date15 Sep 2011
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACV 145/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2010

(ON APPEAL FROM HCPI 1053 OF 2006)

________________________

BETWEEN

CHUNG YUEN YEE, the Administratrix of the estate of Lai Wing Kee, deceased Plaintiff
and
SAM WOO BORE PILE FOUNDATION LIMITED 1st Defendant
SAM WOO ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT LIMITED 2nd Defendant
SAM WOO CONSTRUCTION LIMITED 3rd Defendant
SAM WOO SHIP BUILDING LIMITED 4th Defendant

________________________

Before : Hon Cheung CJHC, Tang VP and Cheung JA

Date of written submission on costs by the plaintiff : 22 July 2011

Date of written submission on costs by the 2nd defendant : 5 August 2011

Date of written submission on costs by the 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants : 4 August 2011

Date of written reply submission on costs by the 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants : 12 August 2011

Date of Decision on Costs : 15 September 2011

________________________

Decision on Costs

________________________

Hon Cheung CJHC :

1.I agree with the decision of Cheung JA.

Hon Tang VP :

2.I agree.

Hon Cheung JA :

3.There are three sets of costs :

(1) The plaintiff’s cross appeal on contributory negligence.

(2) The 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants’ appeal on liability.

(3) The 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants’ appeal on apportionment of liability between them and the 2nd defendant.

4.The plaintiff was successful in the cross appeal and is entitled to the costs thereof.  The 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants are to pay 75% and the 2nd defendant 25% of the plaintiff’s costs.

5.The 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants failed in their appeal on liability.  They should pay the plaintiff’s costs and the 2nd defendant’s costs on their appeal.

6.The 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants collectively reduced their portion of liability marginally from 90% to 80%.  In view of the fact that the appeal on apportionment was only raised on appeal, the 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants are entitled to 10% of their costs on this issue.  The question of offers should properly be the subject matter for the determination of the costs below. 

7.The plaintiff’s own costs to be taxed in accordance with Legal Aid Regulations.

(Andrew Cheung)
Chief Judge,
High Court
(Robert Tang)
Vice-President
(Peter Cheung)
Justice of Appeal

Mr. Andy Hung, instructed by Messrs Pansy Leung Tang & Chua, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Plaintiff

Mr. Russell Coleman SC and Ms Queenie W S Ng, instructed by Messrs Gilbert Tang & Co., for the 1st, 3rd & 4th Defendants

Mr. Lee Tung-ming, instructed by Messrs. Deacons, for the 2nd Defendant