CHUN WO CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO. LTD AND OTHERS v. THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

CACV 338/2018 & CACV 431/2018
(Heard Together)

[2019] HKCA 541

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 338 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCT NO. 54 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

________________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 431 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCCT NO. 54 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

________________________

(HEARD TOGETHER)

________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision on Costs of the Court) :

1.1  On 5 March 2019 we dismissed the defendant’s appeal in CACV 431/2018 and gave our reasons on 27 March 2019. We ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiffs the costs of this appeal. On the same date we also gave our judgment in CACV 338/2018 and dismissed the plaintiffs’ appeal. We ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendant the costs of this appeal.

1.2  Both parties applied to vary the costs order.

CACV 431/2018

2.  The plaintiffs asked for indemnity costs against the defendant.  As this appeal was incompetent in the first place, the defendant is ordered to pay indemnity costs to the plaintiffs.

CACV 338/2018

3.  The practice that a party who failed to set aside an arbitral award is required to pay indemnity costs is well-established by two judgments of this Court in Gao Haiyan v. Keeneye Holdings Ltd (No. 2) [2012] 1 HKC 491 and Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd v. Pacific China Holdings Ltd (in liquidation) (No. 2) [2012] 4 HKLRD 569.   These judgments are binding on us.  Accordingly we will order the plaintiffs to pay indemnity costs to the defendant.  The costs below in HCCT 54/2017 will likewise be taxed on an indemnity basis.