DR SEYED MASOUD SAJJADI ALEHASHEM v. THE HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS

HCIP 48/2024

[2026] HKCFI 3471

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROCEEDINGS NO 48 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

1.  By summons dated 22 April 2026, the plaintiff applied for the following orders:

2.  First, the dismissal of this action pursuant to paragraph 2 of the order dated 13 January 2026 (“the Order”)  be set aside.  Second, the plaintiff be granted relief from sanction for failure to comply with paragraph 1 of the Order.  Third, the execution of the Order be stayed pending the determination of the plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal against the Order.  Fourth, alternatively, the time for compliance with the order for security for costs be extended.  Fifth, costs of this application be reserved.

3.  This summons is supported by an affirmation made by the plaintiff dated 22 April 2026.  The defendants oppose this application.

4.  Having read the relevant papers, the written submissions of the defendants and having heard the parties’ oral submissions, I am of the firm view that this application must be dismissed for the following reasons.

5.  First of all, there is no good explanation for the failure of the plaintiff to apply for relief from sanction within time.  There is clear evidence that the plaintiff is aware of the security order.  The plaintiff said he thought his application for leave to appeal would stop the time for compliance with the security order and this explanation cannot be accepted.  Ignorance of law is no good excuse.

6.  More importantly, there is no good grounds for a stay of execution and there is no valid reason for any non-compliance with the Order as I have set out my reasons sufficiently in my decision for the purpose of rejecting the plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal.

7.  I understand from the plaintiff that he is making a renewed application to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal.  But this does not change my view on this matter.  The plaintiff’s intended appeal is unmeritorious in my opinion.  Without showing this court any merit of his intended appeal, the plaintiff has not met the minimum requirement of a stay.  There is no ground for me to exercise my discretion to order a stay of execution or a relief from the sanction of the security order, which have the same effect.

8.  Then I come to the application for the plaintiff for an extension of time to comply with the security order.  As rightly pointed out by Ms Kung, the same consideration under Order 2, rule 5 should apply and there is no good grounds for this court to consider any extension of time at all.

9.  Alarmingly, the plaintiff asked for a year to pay the security and this request is unreasonable in any view.  And the plaintiff has yet to show his financial condition with cogent evidence to support his claim of his poor financial status.

10.  In the circumstances, I dismiss his application in its entirety.

11.  As regards costs, it should normally follow the event.  The plaintiff should pay costs of the defendants in respect of this this summons.  The defendants have submitted their statement of costs for my consideration, and they asked for HK$79,671. The plaintiff says it is excessive.  I intend to, with a view to saving costs, carry out a summary assessment of the defendants’ costs. 

12.  This is a very simple application.  The plaintiff’s application is clearly unmeritorious and without legal basis.  Though I appreciate the enormous effort put in by the defendants’ solicitors in this matter, I believe their legal cost is on the high side and a downward adjustment is necessary.  Taking a broad-brush approach and without making a mini taxation, I believe a grand total of HK $47,000 would be an appropriate amount. 

13.  Thus, I order that cost of this application summarily assessed at HK$47,000 be paid to the defendants by the plaintiff within 14 days from today.  I dismiss the summons.