Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Reasonable cause of action

Legal area

Court

3 May 2024

勤學樂園對黎嘉年及另一人

Citation

[2024] HKDC 585
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3156/2023

The appeal is dismissed and the hearing officer's order is upheld because (1) the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the first defendant and lacked factual basis to hold the landlord liable or to support the injunction; (2) the alleged conduct by the second defendant, as pleaded, did not constitute sexual harassment under the Sex Discrimination Ordinance nor an actionable tort of harassment; (3) the relief sought was inappropriate or beyond the plaintiff's standing; and (4) the Apology Ordinance does not permit the court to order apologies. Accordingly the impu…
12 May 2023

鄺偉明對香港特別行政區教育局及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1310
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI484/2020

經修改的申索陳述書未能披露針對被告人之合理人身傷亡訴訟因由，並且屬瑣屑無聊或無理纏擾，構成對法庭程序的濫用；教育局在履行政職能時一般不負對個別投訴人之民事謹慎責任；申索亦未遵從O.18 r.12及相關實務指示之形式要求；基於此，維持聆案官決定，剔除申索並撤銷訴訟，相關披露申請亦應撤銷。
14 Dec 2022

蘇麗先對顏頴詩

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1357
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4517/2021

原告的申索陳述書未能顯示任何使被告個人負有交付租金或其他個人法律責任的關鍵事實；相關指稱實質上涉及被告之僱主ISS或機構行為而非被告個人，且有部分指稱無實際基礎屬瑣屑無聊，故在明顯情況下剔除申索並撤銷訴訟為適當；上訴雖逾期但基於短期逾期、未構成重大不公及無律師代表等理由准予延長。
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).
22 Mar 2021

X 對聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會

Citation

[2021] HKDC 336
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1822/2018

The court held that all five claims disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were frivolous or an abuse of process: the discrimination claim failed because the pleadings did not allege that the claimant herself received less favourable treatment on the basis of gender or disability; the tort claims failed because the alleged harm was to the claimant's son and did not give rise to a recognised cause of action for the claimant as a primary or secondary victim. Accordingly the proceedings were struck out and dismissed and costs awarded to defendants.
22 Mar 2021

X 對聖若瑟英文書院法團校董會及另一人

Citation

[2021] HKDC 336
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1825/2018

The court found all five claims disclosed no reasonable cause of action: the discrimination claim failed to plead the statutory elements required to show less favourable treatment on grounds of sex or disability; the four civil claims sought damages for harms suffered by the child and the mother advanced no recognized legal basis for personal recovery (no secondary‑victim or other applicable tort); the pleadings were vague, incoherent in parts, and the litigation conduct and repeated filings constituted frivolous, vexatious and abusive use of court process. Therefore all claims were struck ou…
8 Mar 2019

梁偉儒對梁達明及二人

Citation

[2019] HKDC 244
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1293/2016

The originating summons failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action and the applicant’s later filed documents did not cure that fundamental defect or show a non-fanciful prospect of success; the proceedings amounted to re-litigation of prior concluded actions and therefore were an abuse of process; on that basis leave to appeal under s63A(2) was refused and the dismissal/strike out order is upheld.
26 Jun 2017

UBIQUITI NETWORKS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHAN KIM CHUEN formerly t/a SAN CHUN TECHNOLOGY CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

UBIQUITI NETWORKS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. CHAN KIM CHUEN formerly t/a SAN CHUN TECHNOLOGY CO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1606/2016

Leave to appeal refused because defendants failed to show reasonable prospects of success: there was insufficient evidence of abuse of process given the pleaded facts and history of the first action, the conspiracy claim was pleaded with adequate particulars for defendants to know the case, and the WP letters did not constitute settlement proposals; accordingly the leave application was dismissed and limited relief granted to defendants for time to file a defence with costs to the plaintiff.
3 Mar 2017

黄英儿訴陈良芸

Citation

黄英儿訴陈良芸
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3093/2015

The statement of claim failed to plead facts establishing plaintiff's ownership or exclusive possession of the ashes or that the defendant had sole possession or authority to relocate them; plaintiff also omitted the deceased's son (the husband) as a necessary defendant and did not address regulatory or columbarium constraints. On that basis the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and the registrar's strike-out was correctly affirmed; costs follow the unsuccessful appellant.
14 Jul 2016

LEE YUET YUEN v. HOSPITAL AUTHORITY

Citation

LEE YUET YUEN v. HOSPITAL AUTHORITY
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2701/2014

The defendant's strike-out application was dismissed because on the pleadings the claimant alleged a second distinct incident occurring on or after 21 December 2011 which could found a fresh cause of action within the three-year limitation period; it was not plain and obvious that the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and disputed facts must be resolved in the claimant's favour for a strike-out application under O.18 r.19, therefore the matter should not be summarily struck out.