YUEN OI YEE LISA v. NGAI NGOK PANG AND ANOTHER

CAMP 217/2019

[2020] HKCA 28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 217 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCMP NO 2829 OF 2012)

___________________

___________________

____________________

JUDGMENT

____________________

Hon Yuen JA (giving the Judgment of the court):

1.  On 4 September 2019, Madam Yuen (“the plaintiff” in HCMP2829/2012) issued CAMP217/2019 for leave to appeal to this court from a decision of Au-Yeung J (“the judge”) given on 21 August 2019 in HCMP2829/2012. We consider it appropriate to determine the application without a hearing on the basis of written submissions only¹.

2.  The matter arose in this way.  In HCMP2829/2012 (being proceedings by the plaintiff against Ngai Ngok Pang and Ngai Yu Ling Mony), the judge made a Restricted Application Order against the plaintiff on 1 February 2013.

3.  On 30 July 2019, the plaintiff applied to the judge under that Order for leave to issue the following application in HCMP2829/2012:

“Written application for leave to RPO against Mr Ngai Ngok Leong due to his endless attacks and lies taken against me in HCMP2155/2018 on 23^rd and 25^th April, 10^th May and around 2^nd July 2019 (the one around 2^nd July 2019 was only touched upon by Justice Queeny Au-Yeung during the hearing held in HCMP2155/2018 on 3^rd July 2019) after the Penal Notice ie an Injunction Order issued against both my daughter and me in HCMP2155/2018 on 21^st March 2019”. (Emphasis added).

4.  Just by reading that application alone, it is clear beyond doubt that leave to issue it in HCMP2829/2012 should be refused.  The person named in that application (Ngai Ngok Leong) was not a party in HCMP2829/2012, and the application related to matters that allegedly occurred in another proceeding (HCMP2155/2018).

5.  On 6 August 2019, the judge duly refused to give leave to the plaintiff, stating “no reasonable cause disclosed in the draft summons”. 

6.  On 19 August 2019, the plaintiff issued a summons in HCMP2829/2012 for leave to appeal the judge’s decision of 6 August 2019. 

7.  On 21 August 2019, the judge refused leave, stating “there is no prospect of the court granting leave to appeal against the decision made on 6 August 2019”. The plaintiff then issued CAMP217/2019. 

8.  It is clear from §4 above that this application is misconceived and should be dismissed.  I should add that on 13 September 2019, the plaintiff sent a “written statement (2)” to the court asking this court to “withhold” its decision pending the judge’s decision “to be made in our Summons filed and served in HCMP2155/2018 on 4^th September 2019 first and most important of all”.  For the same reason as set out in §4 above, there is absolutely no ground for this court to “withhold” its decision in these proceedings (CAMP217/2019).

9.  Accordingly, CAMP217/2019 is dismissed.  As we consider the application is totally without merit, we order that no party may request the determination to be reconsidered at an oral hearing².