Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Frivolous and vexatious pleadings

Legal area

Court

5 Apr 2024

呂良森對警務處和警務處處長蕭澤頣

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 932
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1223/2023

The court struck out the statement of claim and dismissed the action because the present claim re‑litigated matters already finally determined (res judicata) and therefore constituted an abuse of process; alternatively the pleadings failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action, were vague and devoid of supporting facts and were frivolous/vexatious, warranting strike‑out and dismissal and an order for costs to the defendants.
21 Jun 2022

呂良森對警務處處長蕭澤頤

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2084
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1751/2021

The court held the statement of claim failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action, was unintelligible and void of factual particulars or causal nexus, and therefore was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process; accordingly the court struck out the statement of claim, dismissed the appeal and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs, to be assessed summarily.
25 Aug 2021

吳崇旭對黃梅明及另一人

Citation

[2021] HKDC 998
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ476/2021

The statement of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and lacked essential particulars rendering it impossible for defendants to prepare a defence; the defects were incurable and the pleading was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process; accordingly under District Court Order No.18 r.19(1)(a),(b),(c) and (d) the court struck out the writ/particulars against both defendants and dismissed the action (the court exercised the power on the defendant's application and also acted sua sponte to remove claims against the first defendant).
15 Nov 2010

HARVEST INDUSTRIAL (HK) CO LTD v. NG NG YEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HARVEST INDUSTRIAL (HK) CO LTD v. NG NG YEUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ175/2010

The summons to strike out was dismissed because the 1st Defendant failed to show the claim was obviously unsustainable or unarguably bad; the pleaded facts could permit an inference of impropriety sufficient to justify lifting the corporate veil and issues of insolvency and intent required trial; deficiencies in the defence pleadings did not mandate striking out at this stage.
25 Jan 2008

WONG YU CHO ROLLY t/a MARCO POLO and CHINA OVERSEA TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT v. NEWTON CHAN known as 陳思奇

Citation

WONG YU CHO ROLLY t/a MARCO POLO and CHINA OVERSEA TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT v. NEWTON CHAN known as 陳思奇
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2808/2007

The court struck out the statements of claim because the claims duplicated issues already finally determined and therefore were barred by res judicata and constituted a collateral attack and abuse of process; they disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous and vexatious; Government Counsel did not owe the plaintiff a duty and the Master was not misled.
20 Jul 2005

YUEN OI YEE, LISA v. KU LAI CHIU, CINDY AND OTHERS

Citation

YUEN OI YEE, LISA v. KU LAI CHIU, CINDY AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ7184/2003

Documents and responses supplied to the Equal Opportunities Commission are subject to an implied undertaking and attract absolute immunity from suit for defamation and malicious falsehood; the plaintiff's fresh pleadings relied on EOC materials and/or advanced inconsistent after‑the‑event assertions, and the pattern of multiple actions and correspondence demonstrated an abuse of process and frivolous, vexatious claims. Therefore the Statement of Claim and writs were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.
8 May 1996

ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD v. STEPHEN VINES

Citation

ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD v. STEPHEN VINES
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2091/1995

The strike-out application was dismissed because prior submissions by counsel did not constitute an express waiver of the slander cause of action; the pleaded paragraphs contained material averments linking the oral slander to subsequent publications by authorisation; the pleadings were not scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and this was not a plain and obvious case warranting strike out or amendment.
15 Jul 1992

TSE WAI KUEN v. HONG KONG GOVERNMENT

Citation

TSE WAI KUEN v. HONG KONG GOVERNMENT
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV103/1992

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the strike out because the pleaded materials did not disclose any identifiable cause of action, were frivolous and vexatious and amounted to an abuse of process, such that the claim had no realistic prospect and could not be properly formulated for trial.