HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Construction and Arbitration Proceedings2004

MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LTD v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Related cases with same parties

  • HCA876/2004WONG CHUK KIN t/a KIN KEE ALUMINIUM CO v. MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LTD
  • HCCT25/2008UDL ARGOS ENGINEERING & HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO LTD v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
  • HCCT3/2008UDL ARGOS ENGINEERING & HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO LTD v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
  • HCCT49/2010YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD v. CHINA STEEL ENGINEERING CO LTD AND ANOTHER
  • HCCT59/2007BUILD FAME SERVICES LTD v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
  • HCMA733/1989THE QUEEN v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
53843-EN-2006-07-10

MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LTD v. YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

HTML content

HCCT92/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTRUCTION AND ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

NO.92 OF 2004

-------------------------

BETWEEN

 MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING LIMITEDPlaintiff
 and 
 YAU LEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMTIEDDefendant

----------------------

 

Before : Hon Waung J in Court

Date of Hearing : 10 July 2006

Date of Decision : 10 July 2006

 

-----------------------

D E C I S I O N

-----------------------

 

1. I have an application before me for security for costs.  It has come rather late in the day, but I think we have come to the view that security for costs ought to be given.  The real dispute between the parties is the quantum. 

2. The $4.1 million figure shown in the skeleton bill at p.107 is an all-inclusive figure and a part of it must be taken away because it relates to costs incurred in relation to the counterclaim.  A graceful concession was made by Mr Clayton that some 70% of the total costs is probably attributable to the claim. 

3. In my view, doing the best I can in the circumstances and making the appropriate deductions for the items referred to in the affidavit of the plaintiff, I order that security for costs in the sum of $2.4 million should be given by the plaintiff to the defendant.  Mr Clayton has informed me that payment into court can be done within three days, so the security for costs will be ordered on the basis of payment into court within three days from today. 

 

 

 (William Waung)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

 

Mr Peter Clayton, SC, instructed by Messrs Wong & Fok, for the Plaintiff

Mr Whitehead, SC, and Mr David Tsang, instructed by Messrs T.H. Koo & Associates,  for the Defendant