法律援助案件的訟費處理？申請獲批

### 案件基本資料 - 案件名稱：AHMED MASOOD v CHUNG KAU ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED - 法院：區域法院 (District Court) - 法官：Marlene Ng - 判決日期：2005年1月28日 ### 案情摘要 本案為一宗人身傷害訴訟 (personal injuries action)。原告Ahmed Masood向被告Chung Kau Engineering Company Limited提出申索。判決日期為2005年1月28日，其後於2005年2月1日發出更正令 (corrigendum)，針對判決書第123段的訟費命令作出補充。更正令主要涉及原告獲得法律援助 (legal aid) 的情況下，其自身訟費的處理方式。 ### 核心法律爭議 本案的核心法律爭議在於人身傷害訴訟的訟費裁定。具體而言，由於原告獲得法律援助，法庭需要決定如何處理其自身訟費，以符合《法律援助規例》(Legal Aid Regulations) 的規定。這涉及在判決中加入一項臨時訟費命令 (costs order nisi)，以確保法律援助署的權益。 ### 判決理由 法官在原判決第123段中裁定訟費，但其後發出的更正令補充了關於法律援助受助人訟費的處理原則。根據更正令，由於原告獲得法律援助，法庭須發出臨時訟費命令，指示原告的自身訟費應根據《法律援助規例》進行評定。這項更正確保了判決在處理法律援助案件的訟費方面符合法定程序和慣例。 ### 引用案例與條文 本案未有特別引用 ### 裁決與命令 法庭就人身傷害訴訟作出判決，並於其後發出更正令。更正令指示在判決書第123段末尾加入一項臨時訟費命令，即由於原告獲得法律援助，其自身訟費應根據《法律援助規例》進行評定。 ### 判決啟示 null --- ### 免責聲明 本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details - Case Name: AHMED MASOOD v CHUNG KAU ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED - Court: District Court - Judge: Marlene Ng - Date of Judgment: 28 January 2005 ### Factual Background This case is a personal injuries action brought by the plaintiff, Ahmed Masood, against the defendant, Chung Kau Engineering Company Limited. The judgment was delivered on 28 January 2005. Subsequently, a corrigendum was issued on 1 February 2005 to add a sentence to paragraph 123 of the judgment concerning the costs order. The corrigendum specifically addresses the treatment of the plaintiff's own costs given that he was legally aided. ### Key Legal Issues The core legal issue in this case, as clarified by the corrigendum, concerned the determination of costs in a personal injuries action, particularly when the plaintiff is legally aided. The court needed to ensure that the costs order complied with the Legal Aid Regulations, necessitating the inclusion of a costs order nisi to address the plaintiff's own costs. ### Ratio Decidendi The judge initially made a costs order in paragraph 123 of the judgment. The subsequent corrigendum clarified the principle for handling costs for legally aided persons. It stipulated that since the plaintiff was legally aided, a costs order nisi should be made, directing that the plaintiff's own costs be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations. This correction ensures the judgment adheres to statutory procedures and practices for costs in legal aid cases. ### Key Precedents & Statutes None prominently cited ### Decision & Orders The court delivered a judgment in a personal injuries action. A corrigendum was subsequently issued, directing the addition of a costs order nisi to the end of paragraph 123 of the judgment, stating that the plaintiff's own costs should be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations due to his legally aided status. ### Key Takeaways null --- ### Disclaimer This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.