WONG SEE LUNG v. PANG KWONG TING

HCA 716/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 716 OF 2012

______________

______________

________________________

DECISION ON COSTS
________________________

1.  Judgment was handed down in this matter on 30 July 2015.

2.  Counsel have drawn my attention to the fact that I have not formally dealt with the counterclaim although it is abundantly plain that the counterclaim failed.  For the avoidance of doubt there will be a formal order that there will be judgment dismissing the counterclaim, with costs to the plaintiff, on a party‑and‑party basis.

3.  The plaintiff seeks to vary the coast order nisi, asking for a certificate for two counsel.  The starting point must be para 2.3 of the First Schedule, Part II of Order 62:

“No costs shall be allowed in respect of counsel appearing before a master in chambers, or of more than one counsel appearing before a master in open court or a judge or the Court of Appeal, unless the master or judge or the Court of Appeal, as the case may be, has certified the attendance as being proper in the circumstances.”

4.  Mr Chiu argues that the circumstances of this case are sufficiently complicated as to justify a certificate for two counsel.  I disagree.

5.  Any complexity that there was in this case arose because of the unnecessary complex and confusing way in which those presenting the case for the plaintiff chose to proceed.  The case was pleaded by the plaintiff in a confusing manner by not making it clear precisely how the claim was based.  The approach at trial continued that confusion and introduced the matters relating to Mr Kevin Lee, which were quite superfluous and irrelevant.

6.  The case was essentially a straight forward factual dispute as to what had occurred and involved no difficult matter of law.  I am satisfied that there should be no certificate for two counsel.  The costs order nisi is made absolute.