CHAN CHI LOI v. CHENG FOR AND OTHERS

CHAN CHI LOI v. CHENG FOR AND OTHERS

The appeal was dismissed because the Re-Amended Statement of Claim plainly sought to re-litigate the same dispute already determined in HCA 22136 of 1998, constituting an abuse of process; the Plaintiff's contention that the previous judgment infringed Article 38 was rejected as incompatible with due process; costs were awarded to the Defendants.

Citation
CHAN CHI LOI v. CHENG FOR AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Chan Chi Loi; 1st Defendant: Cheng For; 1st Defendant: Wong Chung Chuen; 1st Defendant: Hung Ting Ka; 1st Defendant: Cheng Shu Ming; 1st Defendant: Fan She Ming; 1st Defendant: Keung Shing Cheung; 1st Defendant: Kong Muk Wan; 1st Defendant: Lok Chun Wah; 1st Defendant: Lok Wing Tong; 1st Defendant: Tai Kam Wah; 1st Defendant: Executor of Tai Kwan, deceased; 2nd Defendant: Tiu Pui Kwong; 3rd Defendant: Yuen Long Merchants Association Secondary School
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 August 2006
Case Number
HCA540/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Strike Out Order / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Strike Out, Costs, Basic Law Article 38
Source Language
ET
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Abuse of Process Res Judicata Strike Out Costs Basic Law Article 38

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Chi Loi

Plaintiff

Cheng For

1st Defendant

Wong Chung Chuen

1st Defendant

Hung Ting Ka

1st Defendant

Cheng Shu Ming

1st Defendant

Fan She Ming

1st Defendant

Keung Shing Cheung

1st Defendant

Kong Muk Wan

1st Defendant

Lok Chun Wah

1st Defendant

Lok Wing Tong

1st Defendant

Tai Kam Wah

1st Defendant

Executor of Tai Kwan, deceased

1st Defendant

Tiu Pui Kwong

2nd Defendant

Yuen Long Merchants Association Secondary School

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Strike Out Order / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the re-amended statement of claim constituted an abuse of process by re-litigating the same dispute determined in HCA 22136 of 1998
  2. 2 Whether the previous judgment infringed the Plaintiff's rights under Article 38 of the Basic Law
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded and the appropriate quantum

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Re-Amended Statement of Claim plainly sought to re-litigate the same dispute already determined in HCA 22136 of 1998, constituting an abuse of process; the Plaintiff's contention that the previous judgment infringed Article 38 was rejected as incompatible with due process; costs were awarded to the Defendants.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Re-Amended Statement of Claim struck out as against the 2nd and 3rd Defendants and action against them dismissed
  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the Defendants