Lee Chick Choi v. Best Spirits Co Ltd

Read the full judgment text of HCMP 371/2015 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 19 June 2015.

1. On 21 May 2015, we handed down our decision dismissing the plaintiff’s summons seeking leave to appeal out of time. We made an order nisi awarding costs to the defendant which we assessed on a gross sum basis at $50,000, with leave to either party to vary the order nisi within seven days thereafter.

Cited by 53 cases · Cites 1 case

Case No.HCMP 371/2015
Court
High Court CFI
Date19 Jun 2015
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMP 371/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 371 OF 2015

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCA NO. 2045 OF 2012)

________________________

BETWEEN
LEE CHICK CHOI Plaintiff
and
BEST SPIRITS COMPANY LIMITED Defendant

________________________

Before: Hon Kwan and Chu JJA
Date of Written Submission: 28 May 2015
Date of Decision on Costs: 19 June 2015

________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

________________________

Hon Kwan JA (giving the Decision of the Court):

1.On 21 May 2015, we handed down our decision dismissing the plaintiff’s summons seeking leave to appeal out of time. We made an order nisi awarding costs to the defendant which we assessed on a gross sum basis at $50,000, with leave to either party to vary the order nisi within seven days thereafter.

2.The plaintiff lodged a written submission on 28 May 2015 of five pages seeking to vary the order nisi to the effect that there should be no order as to costs in respect of the defendant’s written submission which he alleged was served out of time, for one reason or other.  Further, he asserted that as a bankruptcy order was made against him in HCB 1128/2015 on 18 May 2015, he is not entitled to pay any costs to the defendant.

3.The defendant did not file any reply to this submission.

4.There is no substance in any of the contentions in the plaintiff’s submission.  We decline to vary the order nisi or the gross sum assessment thereunder.  The bankruptcy order makes no difference to the plaintiff’s liability for costs as ordered by this court.  How the defendant is to enforce the costs order against the bankrupt’s estate is a matter for the defendant.

(Susan Kwan) (Carlye Chu)
Justice of Appeal Justice of Appeal

Written submission by the Plaintiff (Applicant), acting in person

Hobson & Ma, for the Defendant (Respondent)

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCMP 371/2015