CHUN SANG PLASTICS CO LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANOTHER

HCA 2278/2008

[2018] HKCFI 661

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 2278 OF 2008

______________

______________

________________________

A D D E N D U M

________________________

1.  I have considered the defendants’ objections to my proposed costs order.

2.  As far as the amendments to the Re‑Amended Statement of Claim were concerned, these were cosmetic at best, occasioned no prejudice to the defendants, save in regard to the new allegation of recklessness (which I disallowed), and took up very little time.

3.  The additional documentation from the plaintiff was inconsequential and could have been dealt with as the trial proceeded. However I had hoped that the defendants would demonstrate some judgment and gave them extra time with a view to achieving some settlement with the plaintiff.  The agreed documentation and agreed facts made the plaintiff’s case virtually unanswerable.

4.  However the opening for the plaintiff was not well-directed and I allowed the plaintiff’s counsel to reconstruct his opening.

5.  I have concluded that I should disallow the plaintiff the costs of 1 ½ days of the trial and I make an order that there should be no order for costs in respect of that 1 ½ day period.

6.  In saying that, the fault lies with the plaintiff’s lawyers not the plaintiff itself (or its directors). Accordingly the plaintiff’s lawyers must not seek to recover their costs for that wasted period from their client.

7.  As to the remainder of the costs my order that the defendants pay them on an indemnity basis stands, and the order is now absolute.