9 Jun 2023
快訊科技有限公司 對 畢天慶及另一人
- Citation
- [2023] HKDC 630
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCCJ1449/2019
法院認為原告並無可接受的新證據或新證人支持上訴；所稱已找到收據正本和證人為未能證實的傳聞，並伴隨延誤及誤導，構成濫用司法程序；因此根據O.18 r.19(1)(b)及(d)維持聆案官剔除命令，上訴被駁回。
Hong Kong Case Law
Strike-out under o.18 r.19
24 Aug 2012
SUNNY TADJUDIN v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
- Citation
- SUNNY TADJUDIN v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
- Court
- District Court
- Case number
- DCEO4/2009
The court refused to strike out pleaded paragraphs because it was not plain and obvious that the pre-17 February 2007 acts could not amount to an "act extending over a period"; factual inquiries are needed to determine whether the alleged incidents are linked as a continuing discriminatory practice, so the time-bar decision cannot be made at this interlocutory stage; therefore the defendant's strike-out application and O.14A determination were dismissed and the challenged paragraphs remain in the Statement of Claim.
26 Jun 1997
SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD. and Another
- Citation
- SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION v. MANDARIN RESOURCES CORPORATION LTD. and Another
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACV68/1997
The appeal is dismissed because the petition contains allegations of continuing conduct and some post-1994 matters such that the question of retrospectivity and jurisdiction is mixed fact and law and not plainly unmaintainable; the judge did not err in refusing to strike out the petition under O.18 r.19 RSC and the matter must proceed to full hearing to resolve factual disputes.