STEPHEN FINLEY v. HOME & HOME PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANOTHER

HCA 11244/1996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 11244 OF 1996

____________

____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1. This is the 2nd defendant's application for leave to re-amend his defence. It was made known at the beginning of today's hearing that the application was not opposed by the plaintiff. Leave to do so was given accordingly.

2. Counsel for the 2nd defendant very fairly indicated that the 2nd defendant is willing to accept:

(1) the usual costs order as regards the costs of the summons;

(2) costs of today's hearing be in the cause.

3. However, this was rejected by the plaintiff who insisted that under the circumstances, the right costs order is to award costs of and occasioned by and thrown away by and incidental to this application to be paid forthwith by the 2nd defendant to the plaintiff, to be taxed if not agreed on an indemnity basis. The plaintiff also suggested that there be a stay of proceedings pending the taxation and/or payment of those costs.

4. I do not think it necessary to set out in detail the relevant circumstances. In short, I agree with the 2nd defendant that there is nothing sufficiently out of the ordinary to justify the unusual order sought by the plaintiff.

5. To conclude, the costs order I will make is:

(a) the usual costs order (to avoid any doubt, that term is to be understood in the way it has been set out in Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2002, paragraph 20/8/51) as regards the costs of the summons to be taxed if not agreed in any event;

(b) the costs of today's hearing (including the costs of any correspondence relating thereto) be in the cause.