Ho Yan Development Co v. Fashion Accessories International Ltd
Read the full judgment text of HCA 1373/2011 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 6 February 2013.
1. On 31 December 2012, I had made decision on the plaintiffs’ application for specific discovery on paper without a hearing. I had also ordered the defendant to make discovery of the documents, viz. the audited account on the waiver fees, unless the defendant made admission of facts relating to the waiver fees. As a result, I ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiffs’ costs with a certificate for counsel. [1]
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case
|
HCA 1373/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ACTION NO. 1373 OF 2011 _________________ BETWEEN
AND HCA 1374/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE ACTION NO. 1374 OF 2011 _________________ BETWEEN
________________________
_______________________________ DECISION ON COSTS _______________________________ 1.On 31 December 2012, I had made decision on the plaintiffs’ application for specific discovery on paper without a hearing. I had also ordered the defendant to make discovery of the documents, viz. the audited account on the waiver fees, unless the defendant made admission of facts relating to the waiver fees. As a result, I ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiffs’ costs with a certificate for counsel.[1] 2.Pursuant to my directions, the parties have now filed the schedules of costs and the lists of objections. 3.I agree with the defendant that both actions herein share the same cause of action and legal principles. I shall make the assessment on costs on this basis. 4.I shall adopt the same broad-brush approach following DBS (HK) Limited v Sit Pan Jit HCA 382/2009 given on 27 December 2012 and in the previous assessment of costs for the application for amendment of the Defence and Counterclaim in these actions, the decision of which I had given on 31 December 2012. 5.The plaintiffs’ bill for each of the actions amounts to HK$34,601.00, including the costs for communications including conferences, telephone calls and letters and the professional works of solicitors and counsel. It is obvious that the bills were drafted on the same basis of §3 above. 6.I have noted the defendant’s objections on each of the bills. Having considered the plaintiffs’ bills and the defendant’s objections, on a broad-brush approach, I award HK$28,000.00 for each of the actions, totally $56,000.00, which can be set off for any costs remaining due to the plaintiff, the balance thereof, if any, shall be paid by the defendant within 14 days from the date of this Decision.
Messrs Yung, Yu, Yuen & Co., for the Plaintiffs in both HCA 1373/2011 and HCA 1374/2011 Messrs Tung, Ng, Tse & Heung, for the Defendants in both HCA1373/2011 and HCA 1374/2011 [1] §19 of Decision dated 31 December 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCA 1373/2011