Introduction
We previously published two articles (“Recent District Court decision on whether ‘gweilo’ remark discriminatory” and “Legal update: What’s the problem with “gweilo” and various local slangs applied to certain ethnicities?”) on this site in respect of the case of Haden, Francis William v Leighton Contractors (Asia) Limited [2022] HKDC 152, where the District Court dismissed a race discrimination claim by a British construction professional (the “Employee”) who alleged that his former employer (the “Employer”) had discriminated against him by terminating his employment.
The District Court subsequently handed down its decision on costs which varied its earlier order that each party bear its own costs and ordered the Employee to pay the Employer’s costs on a party-to-party basis.
We summarise below the main reasoning of the Court and its helpful remarks/ guidance in determining the cost issues in discrimination proceedings.
Costs in discrimination proceedings
Many people may be aware of the normal rule in litigation that a losing party will need to pay the costs of the successful party in the litigation. However, this does not apply as the normal and usual rule in discrimination claims.
Under specific provisions of the District Court Ordinance*, the normal rule in discrimination proceedings is for each party to bear its own costs unless the Court orders otherwise on the ground that:-
i. The proceedings were brought maliciously or frivolously; or
ii. There are...
Qatar’s International Media Office rejects Israeli media claims that its Gaza aid reached Hamas, calling the reports “categorically false.” Qatar’s International Media Office (IMO) has rejected re...