Read the full judgment text of HCCT000112B/1997 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 5 December 1997 before the Hon Mr Justice Findlay.
Procedure — Injunction and damages claim for unlawful interference with right of way — Request for further and better particulars — Plaintiff’s vague allegations requiring clarification — Court’s direction on specificity in pleadings — Consequence of failure to provide particulars — Plaintiff to identify access road and details of obstruction, loss and damages — Exemplary damages claim based on defendants’ profit — Order nisi for costs in favour of defendants. The plaintiff claimed an unlawful interference with its right of way against several defendants who denied such interference and relied on statutory authority. The defendants requested further particulars of the plaintiff’s claim, including details of the right of way, access road, obstruction incidents, wrongful acts, and loss and damage claimed. The plaintiff’s responses were inadequate or ambiguous in many respects. The court ordered the plaintiff to provide further particulars within 14 days and pronounced an order nisi for costs favoring the defendants. The plaintiff was warned it would be barred from leading evidence on matters not particularised. This judgment clarifies procedural requirements for pleadings in claims involving alleged interference with property rights and careful specification of particulars necessary to support claims for damages and injunctions.
Legal issues: Requirement for further and better particulars
Outcome: The plaintiff was ordered to supply further and better particulars of its claim within 14 days. An order nisi was made that the plaintiff pay the costs of this application to the defendants.