So Yue Bun v. Glory Sky Global Markets Ltd and Another

HCA 1042/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO 1042 OF 2015

______________________

______________________

__________

RULING
___________

1.This Statement of Claim which the defendants seek to strike out, together with the cause of action it purportedly contains, is a rambling, disordered, incoherent and, in some respects, unintelligible document of 25 pages which offends all the basic criteria for a statement of claim which is intended to set out succinctly the kernel of a plaintiff’s case in the clearest terms, devoid of unnecessary technical verbiage, evidence, expression of sentiment and personal criticism.   It must contain such serious allegations as: deceit; malicious motive; breach of fidelity, whatever that may mean, in the context of a civil action in contract between two parties at arm’s length without identifying, unequivocally, the basis for such pleas. 

2.In effect, it verges on the insulting to the court when it expects a court to endeavour to sift through such a mass of extraneous and muddled material and identify the germ of a civil cause of action.

3.The plaintiff has now, a week ago, abandoned four of his pleaded claims for money received, conversion, conspiracy to defraud - a particularly serious allegation - and the contention under the arbitration clause in the agreement. I formally strike those out by consent.

4.There are left equally contumelious and offending claims, namely: breach of implied terms of the agreement; deceit and/or fraud; breach of fiduciary duties; and unconscionable contract. 

5.These are, in any event, caught by my earlier comments.  But not only are they inadequately pleaded, baseless it would appear to me, but offend any notion of a properly formulated claim. 

6.Mr Hylas Chung has done his valiant best to justify this document as a valid pleading, but concedes, in any event, that he would have to particularise parts of the claim or claims and seeks an alternative solution, namely the opportunity to go back and provide particulars in respect of, although he does not concede necessarily all the claims, certainly some of the most important claims.

7.Despite those efforts he has been unable to satisfy me that the document, which happily is not his pleading, should stand. 

8.Accordingly, all claims are struck out.  The Statement of  Claim as a whole will therefore be struck out, and the action I dismiss.  The very formulation of the matters in this Statement of Claim I consider to be an abuse of the court process.

9.Therefore the defendants’ application is granted and the action and Statement of Claim are struck out and dismissed with costs.

Mr Hylas Chung, instructed by Mok &Co, for the plaintiff

Mr Anson Wong, SC, instructed by Ching & Co, for the 1st and 2nd defendants