香港律師會 對 黃碩雄

香港律師會 對 黃碩雄

The court found on the balance of probabilities that (i) the Law Society is an affected person under s.27(5); (ii) the respondent has habitually and frequently instituted numerous groundless, abusive and struck out proceedings over about ten years, demonstrating vexatious conduct; and (iii) the respondent was heard...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2217
Parties
Applicant: THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG (香港律師會); Respondent: WONG SHEK HUNG (黃碩雄)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 July 2021
Case Number
HCMP511/2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under High Court Ordinance (cap.4) S.27 for Vexatious Litigant Order (hcmp 511/2021) / Final Judgment (order Granted)
Outcome
Section 27 High Court Ordinance order granted (six year pre‑filing restriction across civil courts) and costs awarded to applicant
Legal Topics
Section 27 High Court Ordinance Order, Restrictive Proceedings Order (rpo) Comparison, Proportionality of Pre‑filing Restrictions, Publication and Enforcement of Orders
Source Language
ch
Civil Procedure Access to Court / Vexatious Litigant Jurisprudence Costs Section 27 High Court Ordinance Order Restrictive Proceedings Order (rpo) Comparison Proportionality of Pre‑filing Restrictions Publication and Enforcement of Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG (香港律師會)

Applicant

WONG SHEK HUNG (黃碩雄)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under High Court Ordinance (cap.4) S.27 for Vexatious Litigant Order (hcmp 511/2021) / Final Judgment (order Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is an affected person under s.27(5) HCO
  2. 2 Whether the respondent habitually and frequently issues vexatious legal proceedings without reasonable grounds
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was accorded an opportunity to be heard

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the balance of probabilities that (i) the Law Society is an affected person under s.27(5); (ii) the respondent has habitually and frequently instituted numerous groundless, abusive and struck out proceedings over about ten years, demonstrating vexatious conduct; and (iii) the respondent was heard or given opportunity to be heard. Balancing proportionality, the court concluded that a s.27 order was necessary and proportionate and therefore made a six‑year s.27 order covering all civil courts with a specified permission procedure, together with a costs award of HKD 151,575.

Court Disposition

Section 27 High Court Ordinance order granted (six year pre‑filing restriction across civil courts) and costs awarded to applicant

Orders

  • Costs: respondent to pay applicant\'s costs on an indemnity/compensatory basis assessed summarily at HKD 151,575; interim costs order may be varied on application within 14 days