Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Withers (A Firm) v Antonia Basile Also Known As Antonia Basile Wilson

Judgment Cited authorities 2 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date09 May 2019
Neutral Citation[2019] HKCFI 1217
Year2019
Judgement NumberHCMP1162/2016
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings
CourtCourt of First Instance (Hong Kong)
HCMP1162B/2016 WITHERS (a firm) v. ANTONIA BASILE also known as ANTONIA BASILE WILSON

HCMP 1162/2016

[2019] HKCFI 1217

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 1162 OF 2016

_____________

BETWEEN
WITHERS (a firm) Plaintiff
and
ANTONIA BASILE
also known as ANTONIA BASILE WILSON		 Defendant

_____________

Before: Hon G Lam J in Chambers

Date of Written Submissions: 18 and 22 February 2019

Date of Decision: 9 May 2019

______________________________

DECISION ON COSTS

_______________________________


1. In my judgment handed down on 4 February 2019 in these proceedings: [2019] HKCFI 325, I dismissed the Firm’s appeal (subject to a minor exception) and made an order nisi that the Firm was to pay the Wife the costs of the appeal. At the hearing I permitted the parties, after the judgment, to deal with costs by written submissions.

2. By a letter of her solicitors dated 18 February 2019, the Wife applies for a variation of the costs order. The ground advanced is that the Wife had by a letter dated 16 November 2018 and marked “sanctioned offer”, offered to settle the proceedings on terms which, it is said, the Firm had failed to beat. The Wife, accordingly, contends that the Firm should pay the costs of the appeal on an indemnity basis.

3. By a letter dated 22 February 2019, the Firm opposed the application. No further submissions have been received from the Wife whether before or after she filed a Notice to Act in Person dated 29 March 2019.

4. The Wife’s offer was as follows: (1) the Wife “abandons and this continues all the claims including costs in the Proceedings [ie HCMP 1162/2016]” against the Firm; (2) the Firm “abandons and discontinues all its claims including costs in the Proceedings” against the Wife. This would be in full and final settlement of all the claims in the Proceedings. In short, it was an offer for both sides to “drop hands” completely.

5. This offer was not accepted by the Firm, which made a counter offer which was not accepted by the Wife either.

6. The outcome pursuant to my judgment is that the 5 OS Bills (which was either unpaid or only partially paid) remain to be taxed as applied for by the Firm, and that Bills 5 to 10 of the Paid Bills are referred to the taxing master for taxation.

7. As can be...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT