Greenpeace East Asia v. 香港綠色和平大聯盟 and Others

HCA 2038/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 2038 OF 2014

________________________

________________________

Before: Hon Anthony Chan J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 24 October 2014

Date of Decision: 24 October 2014

______________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

______________________________

1.Regrettably, there are yet again non-compliances by the professionals in respect of the applicable Practice Directions concerning the filing of the hearing bundles and skeleton argument (see PD 5.3, paras 7.1.3 and 7.3).

2.Mr Tam, who appears for the plaintiff, has very fairly accepted that there is no good explanation for either of the non-compliances.

3.I should make it clear that the infringements in question had hindered the preparation for this hearing by the court.  In the premises, they cannot be overlooked : see Lau Yue Kui & Ors v Philip Chan & Co, HCMP 593/2007, § 37.

4.Pursuant to para 10 of PD 5.3, the court has the power to penalise the professionals from non-compliance.

5.Mr Tam, again fairly, does not quarrel with that.

6.On behalf of those instructed him, Mr Tam accepts that the costs of the hearing bundles should be borne by them by reason of the non-compliance with PD 5.3, para 7.1.3.

7.Further, Mr Tam accepts that 25% of his brief fee, namely, half of the estimated fee for preparation of his skeleton argument should be disallowed to reflect the non-compliance with PD 5.3, para 7.3.

8.In the premises, I make the costs order sought in para 2 of the Summons dated 22 October 2014 with the aforesaid modifications.

Mr Jeffrey Tam, instructed by Tang, Wong & Chow, for the plaintiff

The 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th defendants were not represented and did not appear