X 對 聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會

X 對 聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會

The court held that all five claims disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous or an abuse of process: the discrimination claim failed because the pleadings did not allege that the claimant herself received less favourable treatment on the basis of gender or disability; the tort claims failed because the alleged harm was to the claimant's son and did not give rise to a recognised cause of action for the claimant as a primary or secondary victim. Accordingly the proceedings were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.

Citation
[2021] HKDC 336
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: X; Respondent/defendant: 聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會; Respondent/defendant: 蕭勁鍾老師; Respondent/defendant: 朱立賢老師
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 March 2021
Case Number
DCCJ1822/2018
Procedural Posture
Equality Claim and Related Civil Claims (dceo 1/2018; DCCJ 1822 1825/2018) / Strike Out Application Under District Court Rules Order 18/19 (pre Trial)
Legal Topics
Strike Out, Reasonable Cause of Action, Abuse of Court Process, Gender Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, Secondary Victim, Costs
Source Language
CH
Discrimination Law Tort (negligence/psychiatric Injury) Civil Procedure Education Law Strike Out Reasonable Cause of Action Abuse of Court Process Gender Discrimination +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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Applicant/plaintiff

聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會

Respondent/defendant

蕭勁鍾老師

Respondent/defendant

朱立賢老師

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Equality Claim and Related Civil Claims (dceo 1/2018; DCCJ 1822 1825/2018) / Strike Out Application Under District Court Rules Order 18/19 (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims disclose a reasonable cause of action under Order 19(1)(a)
  2. 2 Whether the discrimination claims allege less favourable treatment linked to a protected characteristic
  3. 3 Whether the claimant (mother) can bring tort claims for psychiatric injury based on harm to her son (secondary victim)

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that all five claims disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous or an abuse of process: the discrimination claim failed because the pleadings did not allege that the claimant herself received less favourable treatment on the basis of gender or disability; the tort claims failed because the alleged harm was to the claimant's son and did not give rise to a recognised cause of action for the claimant as a primary or secondary victim. Accordingly the proceedings were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.