| 单词 | Vexatious and oppressive |
| 释义 | 無理纏擾及屬於欺壓的 能造成嚴重且無法解釋的煩惱及騷擾；極度且不公平地造成煩惱的、具損害性的或具損害性的。舉例說，於香港兩個法庭或審裁處上同時提出訴訟；或當香港是該訴訟的適當 Productive of serious and unjustified trouble and harassment; seriously and unfairly burdensome, prejudicial, or damaging. For example, to bring two actions concurrently in two Hong Kong courts or tribunals; or to continue proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction where Hong Kong is the appropriate forum for the action (Société Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v Lee Kui Jak [1987] AC 871, 3 All ER 510 (PC). However, it is not vexatious to bring an action in two countries where there are substantial reasons of benefit to the plaintiff: Choi Sai Yiu & Ors v Widepower Ltd & Ors [1994] 3 HKC 274 (HC). Where a party seeks a stay on the basis that there are concurrent proceedings elsewhere involving the same or a similar subject matter and identical parties, the starting point is to apply lis alibi pendens-type principles that (i) the court must consider what would serve the ends of justice between the parties to the litigation and the administration of justice generally; (ii) a stay should not cause an injustice to the plaintiff; (iii) the applicant for a stay must satisfy the court that continuing the proceedings would be oppressive or vexatious to him or an abuse of process, that is, unjust, and (iv) where a plaintiff commences proceedings as of right, he should not be deprived of the right to continue those proceedings in the absence of very good reasons to the contrary. While the defendant’s application is not a true lis alibi pendens type of application, there is no need for the applicant to show that continuing the proceedings would be oppressive or vexatious to him or an abuse of process. It is sufficient for the applicant to show that continuing the proceedings would be unjust to him: Intel Corp v Via Technologies Inc & Anor [2002] 3 HKC 650. See also Abuse of process; Frivolous and vexatious; Vexatious interrogatory. 訴訟地時，於外地司法管轄區繼續提出法律程序(Société Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v Lee Kui Jak [1987] AC 871, 3 All ER 510（英國樞密院）。但當有重要理由指出會致使原告人受益，則於兩個國家提出訴訟不屬無理纏擾：Choi Sai Yiu & Ors v Widepower Ltd & Ors [1994] 3 HKC 274（高等法院）。凡訴訟一方基卡於以下情況尋求暫緩聆訊：於另一地方同時提出的法律程序，牽涉相同或相似的標的事項或相同的與訟各方，則首先應引用在別處未決的訟案中的原則，即(i) 法庭必須考慮一般地什麼會符合訴訟各方之間達致公平的及司法的目標；(ii) 暫緩聆訊不應導致原告人處於不公正的情況；(iii) 暫緩聆訊的申請人必須使法庭確信，繼續提出法律程序會對該申請人造成無理纏擾及屬於欺壓的或濫用程序，即並非公正；及(iv) 當原告人有當然權利而展開法律程序，在沒有相反充分理由的情況下，他不應被剝奪繼續提出該等法律程序的權利。當該申請人證明繼續提出該等法律程序，對該申請人而言屬不公正，即已足夠：Intel Corp v Via Technologies Inc & Anor [2002] 3 HKC 650。另見 Abuse of process; Frivolous and vexatious; Vexatious interrogatory。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。