莊如芬 v. 黃志輝 AND ANOTHER

莊如芬 v. 黃志輝 AND ANOTHER

Service by registered post and delivery to known addresses was valid; defendants did not file a defence so the pleaded facts are treated as admitted; the pleaded words were published, identified the plaintiff and were defamatory; malice supporting malicious falsehood was inferable from pleaded facts; on the evidence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] HKDC 24
Parties
Plaintiff: 莊如芬; 1st Defendant: 黃志輝; 2nd Defendant: 梁炳基
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 January 2026
Case Number
DCCJ5245/2025
Procedural Posture
Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Application for Final Judgment in Default of Defence (order 13 R6 and Order 19 R7 Rdc)
Outcome
Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants in default of defence
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Service of Process, Injunctions Against Publication, Assessment of Damages, Apology Order, Pre Judgment Interest, Malicious Falsehood
Source Language
en
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Injunctions Default Judgment Service of Process Injunctions Against Publication Assessment of Damages +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

莊如芬

Plaintiff

黃志輝

1st Defendant

梁炳基

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Application for Final Judgment in Default of Defence (order 13 R6 and Order 19 R7 Rdc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service was valid and defendants in default
  2. 2 Whether publication and identification of plaintiff was established
  3. 3 Whether words were defamatory and false

Ratio Decidendi

Service by registered post and delivery to known addresses was valid; defendants did not file a defence so the pleaded facts are treated as admitted; the pleaded words were published, identified the plaintiff and were defamatory; malice supporting malicious falsehood was inferable from pleaded facts; on the evidence there is a real risk of further publication; therefore final judgment is entered for plaintiff with a permanent injunction limited to the Zello app, removal order for the recordings, damages to be assessed and costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants in default of defence

Orders

  • Judgment entered against the 1st and 2nd Defendants
  • The 1st and 2nd Defendants (whether by themselves or via any agents) are restrained from publishing, procuring or participating in the publication of the Words or similar words defamatory of or containing false allegations concerning the Plaintiff