Overprotecting professionals from ‘vexatious’ claims under the Hong Kong Mental Health Ordinance: The question of access to justice for persons with mental illness

Using Hong Kong’s mental health legislation as a case study, this article asks whether provisions in domestic legal frameworks which seek to restrict the institution of proceedings against those working under such may be justified, given implications they have on fundamental right access justice. Under section 69 Kong Mental Health Ordinance, cannot brought anyone acting pursuance Ordinance unless leave has been by court, and shall not court is satisfied there ‘reasonably arguable’ bad faith or negligence. Limited law jurisprudence general indicate that test likely applied judges stringently, with result patients face virtually insurmountable hurdle should wish bring actions professionals for wrongful negligent treatment Ordinance. The author argues are rooted discriminatory stereotypes persons illness particularly ‘vexatious’ litigants constitute unjustified barriers their equal courts. In case, particular, operates within reinforces broader legislative framework systemically who fall compulsory regime. As such, must seriously reconsidered reformed.