KUN PENG I LTD AND ANOTHER v. WIN POWER INVESTMENT LTD AND OTHERS

HCA 475/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 475 of 2012

__________________

__________________

____________________

DECISION ON COSTS
____________________

1.  Arising out of an appeal against a Master’s decision granting the third party’s application for security for costs against the 2^nd defendant, numerous issues on costs have arisen. The only thing that the parties have been able to agree upon is that this costs decision should be dealt with “on paper”, without a hearing.

2.  Pursuant to directions, both sides submitted a short written submission.  I have read and considered (i) the written submissions, (ii) both parties’ statements of costs for summary assessments, (iii) objections to the statements of costs, (iv) all the correspondence relating to costs issues with enclosures and (v) the Master’s written decision against which the appeal was launched.

3.  I am now asked to make four orders, namely:

(a) costs of an adjournment of the appeal when it was listed for 15 minutes in the 9:30am list on 13 November 2015;

(b) costs of the 2^nd defendant’s unsuccessful appeal against the Master’s order;

(c) costs of this “Decision on Costs”; and

(d) an order for payment out of $103,000 being the sum summarily awarded to the third party following the hearing before the Master, out of the $210,000 being the sum paid into court as security for costs, by the 2^nd defendant.

4.  Confusingly, in the third party’s statement of costs for the adjournment and the appeal, it seeks costs of $84,080 (for the adjournment) and $54,229 (for the appeal). Whereas, in the third party’s written submission, the claim for $84,080 is for the appeal and $54,229 is for the adjournment.  I shall treat the higher sum as the claim for the appeal, not the adjournment.  In a sense it does not matter because the combined sum for both appearances is the same.

5.  I make the following orders:

(1) costs of the adjournment on 13 November 2015 to the third party summarily assessed at $40,000;

(2) costs of the appeal before this court on 12 January 2016 to the third party summarily assessed at $70,000;

(3) costs of this “Decision on Costs” resolved “on paper” to the third party summarily assessed at $25,000; and

(4) an order for payment out of $103,000 being the sum awarded by the Master as the 2^nd defendant’s liability for costs payable to the third party from the $210,000 sum paid into court by the 2^nd defendant as security, forthwith with no order as to costs.