LEUNG SHUI LUN v. DISTRICT LANDS OFFICE OF TAI PO LANDS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

LEUNG SHUI LUN v. DISTRICT LANDS OFFICE OF TAI PO LANDS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

The originating summons was struck out because the plaintiff failed to plead or adduce the necessary particulars or evidence to support the central allegation that squatter control number(s) were assigned to the structures; the allegation of misrepresentation/fraud was unparticularised and therefore vexatious and frivolous; additionally the plaintiff lacked locus standi to sue in the capacity claimed because a power of attorney cannot be granted by an administrator in that context, rendering the proceedings an abuse of process.

Citation
LEUNG SHUI LUN v. DISTRICT LANDS OFFICE OF TAI PO LANDS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Leung Shui Lun; 1st Defendant: District Lands Office of Tai Po Lands Department; 2nd Defendant: Leung King Pong; 3rd Defendant: Chung Leung Hang; 4th Defendant: Tam Kwok Leung
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 October 2016
Case Number
DCMP4/2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Proceedings / Decision (strike Out Application)
Outcome
Originating summons struck out
Legal Topics
Squatter Control, Injunction, Strike Out, Abuse of Process, Misrepresentation, Locus Standi, Powers of Attorney
Source Language
EN
Property Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Squatter Control Injunction Strike Out Abuse of Process Misrepresentation +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leung Shui Lun

Plaintiff

District Lands Office of Tai Po Lands Department

1st Defendant

Leung King Pong

2nd Defendant

Chung Leung Hang

3rd Defendant

Tam Kwok Leung

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Proceedings / Decision (strike Out Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the originating summons discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the claim is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious under Order 18 rule 19
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff pleaded particulars of alleged misrepresentation/fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The originating summons was struck out because the plaintiff failed to plead or adduce the necessary particulars or evidence to support the central allegation that squatter control number(s) were assigned to the structures; the allegation of misrepresentation/fraud was unparticularised and therefore vexatious and frivolous; additionally the plaintiff lacked locus standi to sue in the capacity claimed because a power of attorney cannot be granted by an administrator in that context, rendering the proceedings an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Originating summons struck out

Orders

  • The plaintiff's originating summons filed on 4 January 2016 is struck out with costs to the 1st–4th defendants, to be taxed if not agreed
  • The costs of the plaintiff's originating summons, including the 1st–4th defendants' summons filed on 1 February 2016, are payable by the plaintiff to the 1st–4th defendants, with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed