Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Malicious prosecution

Legal area

Court

6 May 2025

WONG TAK WAI v. CHEUNG WAI SUN AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKDC 692
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3295/2023

Judge preferred contemporaneous police statements, trial transcripts and defendants’ evidence over plaintiff’s account, found plaintiff wholly unreliable on key assertions (notably the claim of seeing D2 self-inflict with a pen), concluded on balance of probabilities that D1-D3 did not assault or fabricate evidence as alleged, held Prison Rules do not create a private civil remedy for the breaches alleged, and therefore dismissed all causes of action against D1-D5 and awarded costs to defendants.
15 Nov 2024

蘇煥榮及另一人對黃俊偉及另二人

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2068
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCSA45/2024

Leave to appeal refused because the appellants failed to demonstrate an arguable question of law: the tribunal's factual findings were open on the evidence, there was no basis to infer the police lacked independent judgment or that defendants alone knew the incriminating facts, and no evidence of actual or apparent bias by the adjudicator.
22 Mar 2024

莊健君對社會福利署署長

Citation

[2024] HKCA 297
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV160/2023

上訴法庭確認原告人的申索陳述書未能披露合理訴因、部分訴因已逾時且整體訴訟構成對社署之瑣屑無理纏擾（濫用司法程序），原審法官剔除訴狀及撤銷訴訟的決定屬正確；有關惡意檢控未獲證明；上訴不得為未在原審提出之新訴因或引入不具重大影響之新證據，故駁回上訴並判付訟費。
18 Sept 2023

THAPA KAMALA v. TONG MING KAY AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1016
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV456/2021

The Amendment Summons was dismissed except for proposed amendments relating to the Court of Appeal's finding of apparent bias by the Deputy Magistrate (Item 12), which may arguably affect the issue of reasonable and probable cause and therefore should be considered at the substantive hearing of the appeal; the remainder of the proposed amendments could not reasonably be seen to cure the pleaded defects and were unnecessary or immaterial. No order was made on the New Evidence Summons because it was contingent on the disallowed Costs Hearing Plea. Costs were awarded against the Plaintiff as det…
9 Jun 2023

LAM WAI IP v. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2023] HKCA 721
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV435/2020

Appeal allowed because the trial judge failed to take into account material evidence (two recorded searches at Kwai Chung Police Station) that contradicted his key factual finding about the New Trousers Episode and mischaracterised the pleaded identity of the prosecutor; those errors rendered the judge's conclusions on absence of reasonable and probable cause and malice unsafe and warranted a retrial before a different judge.
2 May 2023

莊健君對社會福利署署長

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1176
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI30/2022

The claimant's statement of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action and omitted mandatory particulars and statutory procedural requirements for a personal injury claim (absence of medical report and statement of special damages); the pleaded claims were frivolous or an abuse of process and were, in any event, time-barred; the defects were incurable by amendment, therefore the strike-out of the claim and dismissal of the proceedings were justified and the appeal must be dismissed.
25 Mar 2022

梁志文對香港特別行政區政府

Citation

[2022] HKCA 458
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP227/2021

Permission to appeal out of time was refused because the proposed appeal had no real prospect of success: the grounds merely repeated previously rejected arguments without addressing the judge's reasons, and the civil claim impermissibly sought to challenge criminal convictions that remain unoverturned, constituting an abuse of process; accordingly the summons was dismissed and costs were ordered.
18 Mar 2022

LAM WAI YIP 對 THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

Citation

[2022] HKCA 392
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV435/2020

Extension of time to serve the notice of appeal was granted because the appellant filed the notice within the prescribed period at court but failed to effect personal service due to a genuine technical misunderstanding, the respondent had actual notice and was not prejudiced, and the appeal was not shown to be hopeless; therefore justice required exercise of the court's discretion to extend time and allow the appeal to proceed.
18 Mar 2022

林偉業對律政司司長

Citation

[2022] HKCA 392
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP117/2021

Where a notice of appeal was lodged with the court within the prescribed time but was not served on the respondent due to a technical mistake, the court will exercise its discretion to extend the time for service if the respondent had actual notice and the appeal is not plainly hopeless; accordingly the time to serve the notice was extended and no further service was required.
16 Aug 2021

THAPA KAMALA v. TONG MING-KAY (PC4374) AND OTHERS

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2371
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA890/2020

The claim was a collateral attack on final criminal determinations and therefore an abuse of process; the Police Officers, Dr Tam and Mr Haddon-Cave were not prosecutors for purposes of malicious prosecution and misfeasance and the pleaded facts did not disclose lack of reasonable and probable cause or malice with requisite particularity; counsel-on-fiat are not public officers though on the pleaded material Mr Kwan may arguably have acted as prosecutor in failing to disclose his view, but even if arguable no recoverable damages were properly pleaded; overall the amended statement of claim wa…