|
HCA 197/2022
[2023] HKCFI 1823
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
ACTION NO 197 OF 2022
__________________
| BETWEEN |
|
|
|
AHS DEVICE HONGKONG LIMITED |
Plaintiff |
|
AND |
|
|
VT ZERO LIMITED |
Defendant |
__________________
| Before: |
Hon K Yeung J in Chambers |
| Dates of Statement of Costs and Reply
by the Defendant: |
14 and 30 June 2023 |
| Date of Statement of Objections by the Plaintiff: |
28 June 2023 |
| Date of Decision on Costs: |
12 July 2023 |
____________________
DECISION
ON COSTS
____________________
1. By my Decision handed down on 9 June 2023[1], I dismiss P’s Summons. I made a costs order nisi against P, which has become absolute in the absence of any application for variation.
2. I have considered parties’ respective Statement of Costs, Objections and Reply.
3. Despite the amount involved, the application is not complicated, whether on law or facts.
4. In my view, C1 (16 hours on “Attendance on client”), D1 (15 hours on “Preparation of Documents”) and D2 (32 hours for “Perusal of Documents”) are too high.
5. There are also duplications in work.
6. E1 (brief of HK$75,000 for hearing on 16 December 2022) is in my view reasonable. It was a hearing before the Summons Judge on a Summons Friday morning. But with that brief having been charged, the brief of HK$160,000 for the substantive hearing is in my view too high, which reasonable fee I assess at HK$100,000.
7. I note also the other concessions made in the Reply.
8. Adopting a broad brush approach, I assess the costs at HK$500,000.
9. I make no further order as to costs in respect of this exercise.
| |
(Keith Yeung) |
| |
Judge of the Court of First Instance |
| |
High Court |
Statement of Costs and Reply by Hau, Lau, Li & Yeung, for the Defendant
Statement of Objections by YTL LLP, for the Plaintiff
|