Wai Hung Stationery Co And Others v Department Of Justice And Others

Cited as:[1998] 1 HKLRD 445
Court:Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:FAMV1/1998
Judgment Date:20 Feb 1998
FAMV000001/1998 WAI HUNG STATIONERY CO AND OTHERS v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND OTHERS

FAMV No. 1 of 1998

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1 OF 1998 (CIVIL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
FROM CACV 202 OF 1997)

____________________

Between
WAI HUNG STATIONERY CO.
LEUNG SING PING & HO YUK SHEUNG
Applicants
AND
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1st Respondent
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE 2nd Respondent
HONG KONG POLICE FORCE 3rd Respondent

____________________

Appeal Committee : Mr Justice Litton Ag. CJ, Mr Justice Ching, PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary, PJ

Date of Hearing : 20 February 1998

Date of Determination : 20 February 1998

__________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

__________________________

Litton, Acting Chief Justice:

1. This is the determination of the Appeal Committee, on an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal brought under s32(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484.

2. The matter comes to us in this way. On 24 June 1997 the applicants caused a writ to be issued in the High Court against three defendants: the Hong Kong Government, the Commissioner of Customs and Excise and the Royal Hong Kong Police Force. The statement of claim indorsed in the writ said: "The manage affair unsuitable and unfair. So that causes the statement of claim. $30,700,000." This was accompanied by a document addressed to the Acting Chief Justice in which the applicants said they wished to institute proceedings against various government officials. A number of alleged grievances were set out, such as the fact that electricity supply had been cut from their shop, documents forged, court orders violated, the business registration certificate of their business revoked. These allegations were subsequently supplemented by further documents lodged in court, such as, for instance, a complaint that people had incited the applicants' 3 sons to become big spenders and the fact that the first applicant had, subsequent to the issue of the writ, wrongly been accused of obstructing the police in the execution of their duty. We do not purport to set out all the applicants' alleged grievances. These have been detailed in the judgments in the courts below.

...

To continue reading

Request your trial