Y 對 A

Y 對 A

The statements of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action because the claimant did not plead which statutory scope of the Sex Discrimination Ordinance applied and the pleaded facts did not objectively show conduct meeting the s2(5) definition of sexual harassment; several pleaded matters were irrelevant, scandalous or oppressive; accordingly both claims were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.

Citation
[2024] HKDC 1175
Parties
Claimant: Y; Defendant: A; Defendant: B; Defendant: C; Defendant: D; Defendant: E; Defendant: F; Defendant: G
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 August 2024
Case Number
DCEO1/2024
Procedural Posture
Equal Opportunities Litigation (sex Discrimination Ordinance) / Strike Out Application (order 18/19)
Outcome
Both claims struck out and proceedings dismissed; costs awarded to defendants
Legal Topics
Sexual Harassment, Strike Out, Costs, Abuse of Process, Pleadings
Source Language
CH
Discrimination Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Sexual Harassment Strike Out Costs Abuse of Process Pleadings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Y

Claimant

A

Defendant

B

Defendant

C

Defendant

D

Defendant

E

Defendant

F

Defendant

G

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equal Opportunities Litigation (sex Discrimination Ordinance) / Strike Out Application (order 18/19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statements of claim disclose a reasonable cause of action under the Sex Discrimination Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded events fall within an applicable statutory scope (eg employment, provision of goods/services, clubs, government activities)
  3. 3 Whether the alleged conduct objectively contains a sexual element satisfying s2(5) SDCO

Ratio Decidendi

The statements of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action because the claimant did not plead which statutory scope of the Sex Discrimination Ordinance applied and the pleaded facts did not objectively show conduct meeting the s2(5) definition of sexual harassment; several pleaded matters were irrelevant, scandalous or oppressive; accordingly both claims were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.

Court Disposition

Both claims struck out and proceedings dismissed; costs awarded to defendants

Orders

  • Both claim forms and statements of claim are struck out and the proceedings in DCEO 1/2024 and DCEO 2/2024 are dismissed
  • Provisional costs order: claimant to pay defendants' costs in DCEO 1/2024 of 156208 HKD