Read the full judgment text of HCCT 47/2009; HCCT 48/2009 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 23 November 2011 before Hon Saunders J in Chambers.
Costs — Discontinuance — Indemnity costs — Statute barred claims — Duplicate claims— Interest — Pleading of compound interest — Sanctioned payments — Whether indemnity costs appropriate after Calderbank offer — Whether interest should be denied due to failure to beat sanctioned payment Plaintiff Mr Tai Ying Fat brought two related actions against Many Harvest Construction and Sun Fook Kong Construction, asserting claims under a Chinese Settlement Agreement and alleged oral agreements dating back over ten years. The claims based on oral agreements were statute barred and the claims under the settlement agreement were identical in both actions. The claim against Many Harvest was discontinued after legal aid was discharged, but only after rejecting an offer to settle on a costs-each-side basis. The court held that indemnity costs were appropriate from the date of the offer, as the claim was hopeless and the discontinuance late. Regarding the action against Sun Fook Kong, the court held that compound interest was not properly pleaded, limiting interest to simple interest at prime plus 1%. Furthermore, no interest was allowed because the plaintiff failed to obtain a judgment more advantageous than the sanctioned payment. The plaintiff’s failure on most issues and recovery of only 13% of the claimed sum justified costs against him on a full party and party basis. Orders were made accordingly with indemnity costs awarded to Many Harvest post-offer date and interest disallowed on the SFK judgment.
Legal issues: Costs order and indemnity costs · Interest on judgment sum · Costs in relation to success on issues
Outcome: Plaintiff's claim against Many Harvest discontinued with costs ordered against Mr Tai; interest on the judgment in the SFK action disallowed; costs ordered against Mr Tai in SFK action to be taxed party and party.
Cites 3 cases