HO YAN DEVELOPMENT CO v. FASHION ACCESSORIES INTERNATIONAL LTD

HCA 1373/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1373 OF 2011

_________________

BETWEEN

HO YAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
(豪仁發展有限公司)
Plaintiff
and
FASHION ACCESSORIES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Defendant

AND

HCA 1374/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 1374 OF 2011

_________________

BETWEEN

CHAN WING HO(陳永豪) 1st Plaintiff
CHAN WING YAN BENJAMIN(陳永仁) 2nd Plaintiff
FONG SUK YIN JOSEPHINE(陳淑賢) 3rd Plaintiff
CHAN SUK WAH (陳淑華) 4th Plaintiff
CHAN SUK LING JOYCE (陳淑玲) 5th Plaintiff
CHAN SHUK FAN JOYCELYN(陳淑芬) 6th Plaintiff
and
FASHION ACCESSORIES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Defendant

________________________

Before: Mr Registrar K.W. Lung in Chambers

Dates of filing of Written Submissions: the Plaintiffs' submissions filed on 7 January 2013 and the Defendants' submissions filed on 14 January 2013
Date of Decision: 6 February 2013

_______________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

_______________________________

1. On 31 December 2012, I had made decision on the plaintiffs’ application for specific discovery on paper without a hearing. Ihad also ordered the defendant to make discovery of the documents, viz. the audited account on the waiver fees, unless the defendantmade admission of facts relating to the waiver fees. As a result, I ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiffs’ costs with acertificate for counsel.[1]

2. Pursuant to my directions, the parties have now filed the schedules of costs and the lists of objections.

3. I agree with the defendant that both actions herein share the same cause of action and legal principles. I shall make the assessmenton costs on this basis.

4. I shall adopt the same broad-brush approach following DBS (HK) Limited v Sit Pan Jit HCA 382/2009 given on 27 December 2012 and in the previous assessment of costs for the application for amendment of the Defence andCounterclaim in these actions, the decision of which I had given on 31 December 2012.

5. The plaintiffs’ bill for each of the actions amounts to HK$34,601.00, including the costs for communications including conferences,telephone calls and letters and the professional works of solicitors and counsel. It is obvious that the bills were drafted on thesame basis of §3 above.

6. I have noted the defendant’s objections on each of the bills. Having considered the plaintiffs’ bills and the defendant’sobjections, on a broad-brush approach, I award HK$28,000.00 for each of the actions, totally $56,000.00, which can be set off forany costs remaining due to the plaintiff, the balance thereof, if any, shall be paid by the defendant within 14 days from the dateof this Decision.

(K.W. Lung)
Registrar, High Court

Messrs Yung, Yu, Yuen & Co., for the Plaintiffs in both HCA 1373/2011 and HCA 1374/2011

Messrs Tung, Ng, Tse & Heung, for the Defendants in both HCA1373/2011 and HCA 1374/2011


[1] §19 of Decision dated 31 December 2012