PACIFIC HARBOR ADVISORS PTE LTD AND ANOTHER v. WINSON FEDERAL LTD AND OTHERS

HCA 1257/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 1257 OF 2013

________________________

________________________

_______________

D E C I S I O N
(On Costs)

_______________

1.  This court handed down a judgment on 1 August 2014 (“Judgment”), granting, among other things, final judgment of a total sum of US$38m in favour of Ps against the 1^st defendant Winson Federal and/or 2^nd defendant the Executor, and that the 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd, 4^th and 6^th defendant be given leave to defend on the rest of Ps’ claims.

2.  In the present Decision, I shall adopt the same abbreviations in the Judgment, unless otherwise indicated.

3.  Under the Judgment, I have adjourned the question of costs for argument.  I directed that written submissions to be lodged, and unless any party requested for an oral hearing or otherwise directed by the court, the matter would be dealt with on paper.

4.  Ps first lodged their written submissions on 22 September 2014, but as they had referred to without prejudice correspondence, this was objected to, and leave was given for Ps to withdraw their first submissions, and to re-lodge revised written submissions.  This was subsequently done on 22 November 2014.

5.  In the meantime, the 3^rd defendant had filed a notice to act in person, and had not lodged any submissions on costs.

6.  Neither the 1^st nor the 2^nd defendant had lodged any submissions to contest P’s written submissions.  Also, Messrs Cheung & Choy, acting for 1^st, 4^th and 6^th defendants indicated on 13 October 2014 they had no instructions to reply to P’s submissions.

7.  Ps sought costs of and occasioned by the Order 14 summons be paid by the 1^st and 2^nd defendants to Ps forthwith, to be taxed if not agreed with two Counsel’s certificate.

8.  As for the final judgment against 1^st and the 2^nd defendants, for avoidance of arguments, Ps were prepared to leave the issue relating to costs of this part of the action until final trial .

9.  As submitted by Ps, they had succeeded in their Order 14 summons for their monetary claims against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants, and that it was reasonable for them to pursue the interlocutory proceedings, and that Ps had not engaged in any misconduct.

10.  Having considered Ps’ submissions, I see no reason to depart from the usual costs to follow the event.

11.  In the above circumstances, I order that the costs of and occasioned by Ps’ Order 14 summons be paid by the 1^st and the 2^nd defendants to Ps, to be taxed if not agreed, with certificate for two Counsel, and to be paid forthwith.