ATARA SIVAN v. JANNICK JACQUES SIMERAY

ATARA SIVAN v. JANNICK JACQUES SIMERAY

Hong Kong is the clearly appropriate forum for the plaintiff's libel claim because publication and reputational damage occurred in Hong Kong; the plaintiff has a sustainable libel cause of action, harassment/nuisance claims are questionable on present evidence, and an interim injunction should continue because there are serious questions to be tried on libel, damages are inadequate and the balance of convenience favors the plaintiff.

Citation
ATARA SIVAN v. JANNICK JACQUES SIMERAY
Parties
Plaintiff: Atara Sivan; Defendant: Jannick Jacques Simeray
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 September 2011
Case Number
HCA1149/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Torts (libel, Nuisance, Harassment) / Interlocutory Applications Jurisdiction and Interim Injunction (decision)
Outcome
The Defendant's summons challenging jurisdiction is dismissed; the interim injunction is continued until trial with a minor amendment to include certain family members; costs awarded to the Plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Libel, Nuisance, Harassment, Interim Injunction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Place of Publication for Internet Defamation
Source Language
EN
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Injunctions Jurisdiction/forum Non Conveniens Libel Nuisance Harassment +3 more

Case Brief

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Atara Sivan

Plaintiff

Jannick Jacques Simeray

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Torts (libel, Nuisance, Harassment) / Interlocutory Applications Jurisdiction and Interim Injunction (decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Hong Kong is the clearly appropriate forum for the plaintiff's claims under the Spiliada test
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has sustainable causes of action in nuisance and/or harassment
  3. 3 Whether the emails amounted to libel published in Hong Kong

Ratio Decidendi

Hong Kong is the clearly appropriate forum for the plaintiff's libel claim because publication and reputational damage occurred in Hong Kong; the plaintiff has a sustainable libel cause of action, harassment/nuisance claims are questionable on present evidence, and an interim injunction should continue because there are serious questions to be tried on libel, damages are inadequate and the balance of convenience favors the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

The Defendant's summons challenging jurisdiction is dismissed; the interim injunction is continued until trial with a minor amendment to include certain family members; costs awarded to the Plaintiff.

Orders

  • Dismiss the Defendant's summons challenging the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong Court.
  • Continue the interim injunction until trial, with paragraph 2 amended to add: including but not limited to the Defendant's wife [name], daughter [name] and father [name].