Chow Sing Yuet Elton v. Carry Express Investment Ltd
Read the full judgment text of CACV 5/2011 on BabelCite. This 高等法院上訴法庭 judgment was delivered on 7 February 2012 before Hon Tang VP, Kwan JA.
Costs assessment — Application for leave to appeal out of time — Defendant claimed $144,301 costs, including $80,000 counsel's fees and $4,000 per hour solicitor fees for 10 hours — Plaintiff challenged the charges as excessive given the simple nature of the application and short hearing time scheduled — Court found the claimed fees excessive and ordered reduction to $51,201 as fair and reasonable — Application hearing was fixed for half an hour and start time at 9:30 am — Costs were assessed gross sum under O 62 r 9A. Costs ordered accordingly.
Legal issues: Assessment of costs for application for leave to appeal out of time
Outcome: Costs awarded to Plaintiff in the sum of $51,201 as fair and reasonable
Cited by 3 cases
|
CACV 5/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2011 (ON APPEAL FROM HCCT NO. 18 OF 2007) ____________ BETWEEN
____________ Before: Hon Tang VP and Kwan JA in Court Date of Decision on Costs: 7 February 2012 ________________________ DECISION ON COSTS ________________________ Hon Tang VP (giving the Decision on Costs of the Court): 1.This is a gross sum assessment in respect of an application for leave to appeal out of time. Details about the application can be found in our judgment of 13 January 2012. The Defendant's statement of costs under O 62 r 9A shows an amount of $144,301 of which $80,000 represented counsel's fee. The solicitor's fees was charged at $4,000 per hour for a total of 10 hours. 2.The Plaintiff has suggested a reduction of $93,100, the bulk of which related to counsel's fee (a reduction of $50,000). It is also said that the time charged and the hourly rate of $4,000 were excessive having regard to the simple and straightforward nature of the application. 3.We agree. Also, the hearing was fixed for half an hour and listed for hearing at 9:30 am. In such circumstances, we believe $51,201 to be entirely adequate and will order that to be paid under O 62 r 9A.
Messrs Johnnie Yam, Jacky Lee & Co, for the Plaintiff Messrs V Hau & Chow, for the Defendant |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 5/2011