MOHAMMAD BASHIR v. KAM HOI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND OTHERS

MOHAMMAD BASHIR v. KAM HOI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND OTHERS

The Court dismissed the striking out application because D2-D6 failed to show a plain and obvious case for striking out: the Consent Judgment against D1 did not finally determine employer identity (D1 was not incorporated at the accident) and thus did not estop the Plaintiff from suing different parties; res judicata/issue estoppel did not apply as the earlier proceeding involved a different party and the consent order did not resolve the substantive issues; the joinder order did not limit the scope of pleaded causes of action; no abuse of process or oppression was established.

Citation
MOHAMMAD BASHIR v. KAM HOI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: MOHAMMAD BASHIR; 1st Defendant: KAM HOI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: KAM HOI INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LIMITED; 3rd Defendant: YIELD CROWN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LIMITED; 4th Defendant: STEPHEN FUNG KAP HUEN; 5th Defendant: CHAN WING MUI JANET; 6th Defendant: LEE SIU CHING
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 February 2009
Case Number
DCPI401/2006
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries / Striking Out Application (order 18 R.19)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Joinder of Parties, Employees Compensation, Striking Out
Source Language
EN
Civil Personal Injury Employment Law Civil Procedure Insurance Law Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process +3 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MOHAMMAD BASHIR

Plaintiff

KAM HOI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LIMITED

1st Defendant

KAM HOI INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LIMITED

2nd Defendant

YIELD CROWN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL LIMITED

3rd Defendant

STEPHEN FUNG KAP HUEN

4th Defendant

CHAN WING MUI JANET

5th Defendant

LEE SIU CHING

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries / Striking Out Application (order 18 R.19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claim against D2-D6 is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious
  2. 2 Whether claim prejudices, embarrasses or delays the fair trial
  3. 3 Whether the claim is an abuse of process by reason of res judicata or issue estoppel

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the striking out application because D2-D6 failed to show a plain and obvious case for striking out: the Consent Judgment against D1 did not finally determine employer identity (D1 was not incorporated at the accident) and thus did not estop the Plaintiff from suing different parties; res judicata/issue estoppel did not apply as the earlier proceeding involved a different party and the consent order did not resolve the substantive issues; the joinder order did not limit the scope of pleaded causes of action; no abuse of process or oppression was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application by the 2nd to 6th Defendants to strike out and dismiss the Plaintiff's claim is dismissed
  • Order nisi that costs of and occasioned by this application (including reserved costs) be paid by D2, D3, D4, D5 and D6 to the Plaintiff with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed