Read the full judgment text of HCA 376/2017 on BabelCite. This Court of First Instance judgment was delivered on 31 December 2018 before 歐陽桂如.
Civil procedure – striking out pleadings – abuse of process – scandalous, frivolous or vexatious claims – defamation – reasonable cause of action – whether pleadings disclose a cause of action – whether pleadings can be cured by amendment – Rules of the High Court O.18 r.19 – plaintiff former employee of subsidiary – plaintiff aged 69 and reached statutory retirement age – multiple failed claims in mainland China from 2011 to 2015 – failed claim in Labour Tribunal in December 2015 – plaintiff filed claim in February 2017 against 19 defendants including holding company, subsidiary, and 17 individual directors – claim sought HK$20 million in moral damages and public apology – claim included allegations of threats, intimidation, suspected kidnapping, surveillance, insult, deception, fraud, embezzlement, and defamation – defendants applied to strike out statement of claim and dismiss action in March 2018 – Master struck out claim and dismissed action due to plaintiff's non-attendance on 16 March 2018 – plaintiff appealed alleging defendants gave false evidence under oath – re-hearing on appeal – held: defamation claim should be struck out because statement of claim failed to plead specific words, publication to third parties, and defamatory meaning as required by Gatley on Libel and Slander – surveillance claim should be struck out because allegations were contradicted by plaintiff's own SMS records and evidence showed security only refused entry without conflict – claims of criminal conduct (threats, intimidation, kidnapping, fraud) should be struck out because they were bare assertions without factual particulars – HK$20 million claim should be struck out because no factual basis for calculation was provided – claims against individual directors should be struck out because directors are not personally liable for company actions and plaintiff's motive was to harass – embezzlement claim should be struck out because directed at three non-parties – entire action should be dismissed because all causes of action had no prospects of success and could not be cured by amendment – appeal dismissed – plaintiff to pay all defendants' costs summarily assessed at HK$128,100 – costs order to be finalized after 14 days unless varied on application by summons.
Legal issues: Striking out the defamation claim · Striking out claims of criminal conduct including surveillance · Striking out claims against individual directors · Whether the entire action should be dismissed
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; entire action struck out and dismissed
Cited by 30 cases