JK BALLET & JAZZ SCHOOL LTD v. JOLLY KIDS EDUCATION AND DANCING ACADEMY LTD AND OTHERS

HCIP 68/2022

[2024] HKCFI 2132

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROCEEDINGS NO. 68 OF 2022

____________

____________

_________________________________

SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

_________________________________

1.  This is the paper summary assessment of costs in respect of the consent order made by me on 24 June 2024 (“the Consent Order”).

2.  The Consent Order was made in respect of an application taken out by the Defendants for an order that the amendments made without the leave of the court by the Plaintiff in its Amended Reply and Defence to Counterclaim be disallowed and struck out (“the Striking Out Application”). Eventually the parties agreed, by way of the Consent Order, for the Plaintiff to withdraw the Amended Reply and Defence to Counterclaim and for the Defendants to withdraw the Striking Out Application. The parties also agreed that the Plaintiff would pay the Defendants’ costs of and occasioned by the Striking Out Application (including the hearing on 1 February 2024 with certificate for counsel) and such costs to be summarily assessed and paid forthwith.

3.  In the Statement of Costs, the Defendants claim total costs in the sum of $158,786.01. On the other hand, the Plaintiff argues that the costs should not exceed the sum of $24,729.34.

4.  Since there is no substantive hearing of the Striking Out Application and no opposing affirmation filed by the Plaintiff, I take the view that the amount claimed by the Defendants is very much excessive. In particular, the time spent on communications and perusal of documents is more than necessary.

5.  I have perused the contents of the affirmation made in support of the Striking Out Application. The Defendants need to deal with the facts of the case to support the application itself. Certain allowance should therefore be made for the works in gathering the supporting facts. Yet the time spent is excessive. Adopting a holistic and broad-brush approach, I summarily assess the Defendants’ costs in the sum of $85,000.