YUEN OI YEE LISA v. NGAI NGOK PANG AND ANOTHER

CAMP 295/2019 & CAMP 296/2019
(Heard together)

[2020] HKCA 833

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 295 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCMP NO 2829 OF 2012)

___________________

___________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 296 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCMP NO 2829 OF 2012)

___________________

__________________

(Heard together)

_________________________

DECISION

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

_________________________

Hon Chu JA giving the Decision of the court:

1.  On 31 August 2020, we handed down our judgment: (a) dismissing the plaintiff’s summons in CAMP 295/2019 with costs to the 1^st defendant; (b) dismissing the plaintiff’s summons in CAMP 296/2019 with costs to the 1^st and 2^nd defendants; and (c) giving directions for the filing of statement of costs and statement of objection to facilitate summary assessment of the costs orders in (a) and (b) above.

2.  The 1^st defendant had lodged statements of costs dated 11 September 2020 for each of the actions.  The 2^nd defendant in CAMP 296/2019 has not lodged any statement of costs.  On 14 September 2020, the plaintiff lodged her statements of objection in both actions, the contents of which are identical. 

3.  Thereafter, the plaintiff as well as the 1^st defendant had separately sent written representations to the Court.  Our directions on 31 August 2020 did not provide for further round of submissions.  These representations were made without leave of the Court, and the contents are wholly irrelevant to the summary assessment of the costs of the two applications.  We will not have regard to them.    

CAMP 295/2019

4.  The 1^st defendant claimed a total of $7,900, comprising 39 hours of work at $200 per hour, and disbursement in the sum of $100.

5.  The thrust of the plaintiff’s objections to the costs claimed by the 1^st defendant is that he had on different occasions wrongfully sent letters to her daughter at the hospital where she worked as a medical doctor.  

6.  We had considered the volume and content of the papers and submissions filed and lodged by both sides in the application for leave to appeal in this action. Adopting a broad brush approach, we would assess the 1^st defendant’s costs (inclusive of disbursement) at $5,000.

CAMP 296/2019

7.  The 1^st defendant claimed a total of $2,100, comprising 10 hours of work at $200 per hour, and disbursement in the sum of $100.  The 1^st defendant acknowledged that some of the grounds of opposition to the plaintiff’s application overlap with those in CAMP 295/2019.

8.  As in the case of CAMP 295/2019, the plaintiff’s statement of objections mainly complains that the 1^st defendant wrongfully sent letters and documents to the hospital where her daughter worked.   

9.  We consider the amount claimed by the 1^st defendant to be reasonable and will allow it in full.

Other matters

10.  The 1^st defendant has raised two matters in his application for costs, which we would briefly dealt with.

11.  First, the 1^st defendant queried why the court did not just award a sum as the costs instead of requiring him to provide a statement of costs.  Costs are to compensate a receiving party’s actual expenses and time and efforts incurred by him in the proceedings.  Accordingly, it must be for the receiving party himself to quantify and inform the court, by way of a statement of costs, the amount of time and expenses he has spent.  The court is not in a position to draw up the statement of costs for him.

12.  Second, the 1^st defendant indicated he could not fully understand the judgment and requested the court to give its judgment in Chinese.  We consider it is appropriate to give our decision in English having regard to the fact that most of the papers involved in the applications for leave to appeal are in the English language, and the papers and orders in the proceedings associated with the present applications are also in the English language.   

Summary

13.  The amounts of the 1^st defendant’s costs to be paid by the plaintiff are summarily assessed at $5,000 in CAMP 295/2019, and $2,100 in CAMP 296/2019.