LEUNG KIN MING v. THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT

HCA 315/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 315 OF 2002

____________

____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1. I have before me an application to strike out the Statement of Claim in this action under O.18 r.19 of the Rules of the High Court and the inherent jurisdiction of the court, on the ground that the Statement of Claim discloses no reasonable cause of action, or is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious, or it may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action, or it is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.

2. The application was adjourned by a Master to a judge on 6 March 2002 at the request of the defendant, because it is the defendant's understanding that the plaintiff is bound to appeal to a judge in chambers if the defendant should succeed before a Master.

3. At the hearing today, the plaintiff has not appeared. I am told by Mr Raymond Tam who appeared for the defendant that he received information from the plaintiff's wife that the plaintiff has withdrawn this action. However, as there is no record on the court file of any withdrawal of this action by the plaintiff, I think it is best that the defendant should proceed with its application to strike out the claim.

4. The plaintiff has issued a writ endorsed with a Statement of Claim in which it is stated that he sued the Hong Kong Government for "justice to be seen to be done and inassessible damages".

5. It is difficult to discern from his Statement of Claim what is his cause of action against the Hong Kong Government. He has annexed a bundle of letters to his Statement of Claim consisting of letters written to him by various government bodies in response to the complaints he made regarding leakage from pipes at the premises above a property he owned in Cloud View Road, North Point and suspected dumping of toxic chemicals from the premises above that property and from the upper premises above another property owned by the plaintiff in Ha Heung Road, To Kwa Wan. He would appear to be complaining in his Statement of Claim that the Government has not dealt with his complaint seriously or at all. It is quite clear that his Statement of Claim discloses no cause of action known to the law and has not been properly formulated, even making allowance as one would to a pleading done by a litigant in person.

6. For the above reasons, I make an order as sought in the defendant's summons. I order that the Statement of Claim herein be struck out and the plaintiff's action against the defendant be dismissed.

7. Mr Tam has informed me that the defendant would not seek costs against the plaintiff in this action or in the application, I therefore make no order as to costs.