Read the full judgment text of HCMP 243/2011 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 17 January 2014 before Hon Au-Yeung J.
Costs – Certificate for 2 counsel – Slip rule – Functus officio – Consent Judgment – Implied term – Civil Justice Reform – Whether court functus officio regarding costs orders – Whether slip rule applies to amend orders – Whether consent judgment contained implied term for 2 counsel fees – Court held functus officio to grant fresh discretion but slip rule applies where manifest intention clear – Application dismissed for categories A, B, C1, E and D (matters for Taxing Master) – Granted for category C2 and D3's order – Defendants denied costs of summons due to CJR principles.
Legal issues: Functus officio and slip rule applicability · Application of slip rule to Categories A, B, C1 and E · Application of slip rule to Category C2 · Interpretation of Consent Judgment (Category D) · Costs of the summons application
Outcome: Applications dismissed for most categories (A, B, C1, E, D), granted for C2 and D3's order (F). Costs of summons denied to Defendants.
Cites 9 cases