黃碩雄 對 林雲浩法官及另一人

黃碩雄 對 林雲浩法官及另一人

The writ was struck out and the claim dismissed because it disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was malicious/frivolous/vexatious and an abuse of court process; allegations against the judge and commission were barred by judicial immunity (Basic Law s85 and Cap.92 s10) and contempt allegations lacked locus standi and required permission; the pleading defects were incurable so the entire writ was struck out and costs were awarded to defendants on an indemnity/compensation basis.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1140
Parties
原告人: 黃碩雄; 第一被告人 (法官): 林雲浩法官; 第二被告人 (委員會): 委任司法人員推薦委員會
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 April 2022
Case Number
HCMP897/2021
Procedural Posture
HCMP (civil Miscellaneous) / Interlocutory Strike‑out Application (order 18 R19)
Outcome
Original writ filed 28 June 2021 struck out and claim dismissed; proceedings discontinued
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Judicial Immunity, Contempt of Court, Costs (indemnity/compensation)
Source Language
CH
Civil Procedure Judicial Immunity Administrative Law Contempt Strike Out Abuse of Process Res Judicata Contempt of Court +1 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

黃碩雄

原告人

林雲浩法官

第一被告人 (法官)

委任司法人員推薦委員會

第二被告人 (委員會)

Procedural Posture

HCMP (civil Miscellaneous) / Interlocutory Strike‑out Application (order 18 R19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the writ discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether allegations against a judge and the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission disclose viable claims or are frivolous/vexatious or an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether judicial immunity under Basic Law s85 and Cap.92 s10 prevents suit against a judge or committee members for acts in judicial/committee capacity

Ratio Decidendi

The writ was struck out and the claim dismissed because it disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was malicious/frivolous/vexatious and an abuse of court process; allegations against the judge and commission were barred by judicial immunity (Basic Law s85 and Cap.92 s10) and contempt allegations lacked locus standi and required permission; the pleading defects were incurable so the entire writ was struck out and costs were awarded to defendants on an indemnity/compensation basis.

Court Disposition

Original writ filed 28 June 2021 struck out and claim dismissed; proceedings discontinued

Orders

  • Strike out the original writ and dismiss the claim
  • The claim is discontinued (撤銷申索)