IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
ADMIRALTY ACTION NO.7 OF 2006
Before : Hon Waung J in Chambers
Date of Hearing : 25 April 2006
Date of Judgment: 25 April 2006
J U D G M E N T
1. I have an application before me for security for costs. The plaintiff does not now dispute that there is a liability to give security. The dispute before me this morning is now on quantum.
2. The dispute in this Action is not a straightforward matter. In going through the pleadings Mr Tsui for the defendant has referredme to at least three substantial issues that are required to be resolved. I am of the view, that having regard to the liberty toseek additional security that the security that is now sought to cover all steps up to discovery should be less than what is nowclaimed in the sum of $180,000. $180,000 would be tantamount to over 50 hours of partners’ time. Although this case is not straightforward,in my view, a sum of perhaps $120,000, representing hourly rate of $3,000 at 40 hours, will be more than sufficient for the presentpurposes. The defendant can always come back for further security as is envisaged in the summons.
3. So the order I will make is order in term of paragraph 1 except the sum is $120,000 and the time allowed is 28 days from the dateof this order, and paragraph 2 except there is no default provision in paragraph 2. Paragraph 3 as stated in the summons and I willhear the parties on paragraph 4.
Mr Andrew Horton of Messrs Richards Bulter, for the Plaintiff
Mr Sam Tsui of Messrs Tsui & Co., for the Defendant