Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Frivolous and vexatious proceedings

Legal area

Court

22 Apr 2026

CHAN TUN HAU v. SZE YAN YAN AILEEN AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2052
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2240/2024

The Amended Statement of Claim failed to plead facts sufficient to establish the requisite proximity or duty of care by the 1st Defendant because the representations were unrelated to her role and there was no reasonable basis for the plaintiff to rely on them without verification; additionally the 1st Defendant's uncontroverted evidence that the plaintiff was allotted the cryptocurrency meant no loss was pleaded; accordingly the strike-out was correctly ordered and the appeal dismissed.
19 Nov 2024

曹連英對禤氏律師行

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1924
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4635/2023

Documentary evidence (signed instruction, discharge, authorization and bank records plus plaintiff's acknowledgements) established that the plaintiff knowingly accepted HK$700,000 as final settlement; the pleaded allegations were contradicted by those documents, were frivolous/vexatious and an abuse of process and therefore all claims were properly struck out and the action dismissed under O.18 r.19.
25 Jun 2024

NG HON SUM 對 LAM MAN LUNG 及另一人

Citation

[2024] HKDC 943
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEO7/2023

The applicant's claims were frivolous, unrelated to the Sex Discrimination Ordinance and constituted an abuse of process; accordingly the exceptions in District Court Ordinance s73B(3) apply and the applicant must pay the first respondent's costs, including the barrister's certificate.
18 Mar 2024

楊嬡對南華金融控股有限公司及另一人

Citation

[2024] HKDC 276
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3374/2022

The pleadings failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action because the plaintiff did not plead facts establishing any contractual or tortious duty by the first defendant; the claim was therefore frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. The strike-out order was upheld and the appeal dismissed with costs.
2 May 2023

YUEN OI YEE LISA v. NGAI NGOK LEONG

Citation

[2023] HKCA 628
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV245/2022

The originating summons against NNL disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was frivolous and an abuse of process because NNL was not a party to the prior proceedings and had no duty to the appellant; the allegations of forgery and bias did not provide a valid basis to relitigate concluded matters; accordingly the strike out, dismissal and the restricted proceedings order were justified and the appeal is dismissed.
30 Jul 2021

范敏怡小姐對肯尼狄律師行(胡百豪大律師)

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2215
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP537/2021

The originating process and accompanying affidavit failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action; the allegations were unsupported, rambling and largely identical to matters already litigated and struck out in prior proceedings, rendering the new claim frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process; accordingly the court struck out and revoked the originating process and ordered provisional costs to the defendant.
31 Dec 2020

MAKHSSIAN TRAJAN VAHE v. MAYER BROWN JSM, MAYER BROWN INTERNATIONAL LLP alias MAYER BROWN. SOLICITOR ASSOSIATE SIMON AU MING, AVOCATE SOLICITOR, DAVID MCKELLAR

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 3168
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA934/2020

The claim was struck out and the action dismissed because the pleaded defamatory statements were not made by the defendants and were not attributable to them, the court order wording is an act of the court covered by absolute privilege, the plaintiff's allegations of forgery and other serious misconduct were unsupported and inherently implausible, and the proceedings are frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process (including effectively re‑litigation of matters previously disposed of).
1 Aug 2019

YUEN OI YEE LISA AND ANOTHER v. NGAI NGOK PANG AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1933
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2155/2018

Claims were struck out because, even accepting plaintiffs' evidence, the acts complained of did not interfere with plaintiffs' use or enjoyment of land (UCH was not their land or place of occupation), therefore no reasonable cause of action in nuisance was disclosed and the claims were frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process; withdrawal resolved joinder as to D2.
22 Jun 2015

DARRYL PENRICE v. CHAN KWOK JI, ERIC, IDSM, DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND OTHERS

Citation

DARRYL PENRICE v. CHAN KWOK JI, ERIC, IDSM, DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2983/2014

The claim against the 4th defendant was struck out because the Statement of Claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action in the absence of any allegation of bad faith contrary to statutory immunity under the Ombudsman Ordinance; the claim was scandalous, frivolous and vexatious on its face; and pursuing private law relief for matters properly of public law constituted an abuse of process. The asserted monetary claim additionally exceeded the court's jurisdiction and lacked foundation.
25 Jan 2008

WONG YU CHO ROLLY t/a MARCO POLO and CHINA OVERSEA TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT v. HO CHI SUM AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG YU CHO ROLLY t/a MARCO POLO and CHINA OVERSEA TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT v. HO CHI SUM AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2807/2007

The court held the claims were barred by res judicata and constituted an abusive collateral attack that disclosed no reasonable cause of action, were frivolous and vexatious; accordingly both statements of claim and writs in DCCJ 2807/2007 and DCCJ 2808/2007 were struck out and the actions dismissed with costs to defendants.