Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Res judicata / abuse of process

Legal area

Court

18 Jan 2023

SINGH BALJIT v. FORWARD & CO., LAWYERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 188
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1097/2022

The ASOC was struck out and the action dismissed because it amounted to an abuse of process/res judicata: it involved identical parties and the same factual matrix as the earlier action already struck out and dismissed on the ground that the claim fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labour Tribunal; the purported new allegations failed to plead requisite facts or legal causation and were irrelevant or scandalous; therefore the pleading disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was frivolous or vexatious. Indemnity costs were awarded.
15 Sept 2022

LO KAI SHUI v. HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1363
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP182/2022

Direct application for leave to appeal the indemnity costs order was dismissed for lack of exceptional circumstances and want of merit; the Judge's award of indemnity costs was within discretion because the plaintiff's conduct amounted to abuse of process and the interlocutory applications were incidental to the overlapping claims; the renewed leave application on the Exclusion/Amendment/Withdrawal summonses was refused because there is no reasonable prospect of success and appellate review of detailed interlocutory cost allocation is inappropriate absent plain error; consequential case-manag…
29 Sept 2020

YUEN OI YEE LISA v. NGAI NGOK PANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2541
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1128/2020

The originating summons disclosed no reasonable cause of action; key reliefs duplicated or were barred by earlier proceedings and/or limitation and constituted an abuse of process; an RAO was not justified on the facts; the defects were incurable by amendment; therefore the OS was struck out and the claims dismissed.
27 Sept 2019

MA WING FAI AND OTHERS v. HOPE 88 LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2394
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2488/2014

The court found the father did not make the alleged specific representations that would give rise to a proprietary estoppel or irrevocable licence; the purported promises were vague, inconsistent and not recorded, so equitable relief fails. The informal family tenancy arrangements terminated on expiry absent clear agreement to continue; Hope 88 had no locus and Actions 1 and 3 succeed for possession. Mesne profits are recoverable from dates specified (post-death or post-writ) because the father allowed occupation rent-free in his lifetime but legal owners regained rights thereafter.
22 Feb 2019

NG TUNG v. GRAND WAYFAIR INVESTMENT CO LTD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 431
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1682/2017

Strike-out applications dismissed because the 2007 proceedings were confined to Lot 78, defendants failed to prove the plaintiff deliberately suppressed viable claims to the other lots or that proceeding now is an abuse; the burden to establish abuse was not discharged.
19 Oct 2018

HOSSAIN RIPON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2184
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL916/2017

The application was dismissed because it was identical to a previous leave application already properly refused by the court; the applicant did not appeal that refusal, so the second application is barred as res judicata and constitutes an abuse of court process, justifying dismissal without further hearing.
21 Sept 2018

HALDER REKHA RANI v. ABU B. BIN WAHAB, ESQ.,AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2069
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1080/2017

The application for leave was dismissed because it amounted to an abuse of the court's process and was barred by res judicata: the applicant had previously advanced identical grounds which were considered and dismissed in HCAL 135/2017 and the present application raises no new material warranting re-opening the matter, therefore leave is refused.
13 Jul 2018

IFTEKHAR ZAMADER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1520
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL911/2017

The application for leave was refused because it was an abuse of the court process: the applicant had previously sought identical relief and been refused leave, offered no explanation or new material to justify a second identical application, and the Board had already confirmed the Directors decisions rejecting non-refoulement protection; therefore res judicata/abuse of process required refusal of leave.
29 Dec 2017

HARBOUR FRONT LTD v. LEUNG YUET KEUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

HARBOUR FRONT LTD v. LEUNG YUET KEUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1143/2016

The claim was struck out in its entirety because Harbour Front failed to establish prima facie locus to sue derivatively for either Money Facts or Fonfair, much of the pleaded loss was reflective of company loss and thus impermissible, the pleadings were vague and did not disclose actual fraud or personal gain by the directors required for the fraud-on-the-minority exception, alternative remedy (winding up petitions) was available and ongoing, and Harbour Front was not a proper plaintiff due to prior misconduct (lack of clean hands).
15 Oct 2012

RICHLY BRIGHT INTERNATIONAL LTD v. DE MONSA INVESTMENTS LTD

Citation

RICHLY BRIGHT INTERNATIONAL LTD v. DE MONSA INVESTMENTS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA548/2012

Summary judgment granted: the defendant's mental incapacity defence was an abuse of process and barred by prior final determinations (notably Probus and reinforced by King’s City) covering the same period and issue; alternative defences (undue influence, title defect, champerty, alternative measure of damages) were unestablished or without merit; plaintiff entitled to summary judgment and costs.