AU YEE MING IVAN v. NG FEI TIP

AU YEE MING IVAN v. NG FEI TIP

The court held the pre-trial written concessions in the consent order were binding and refused the late withdrawal absent exceptional circumstances; the spoken Statement was defamatory in its natural and ordinary meaning as imputing incompetence/unsuitability in the plaintiff's office and was actionable per s23 DO; defendant's pleas of justification and fair comment failed for want of proper particularisation and evidential support and were rejected; defendant held liable and awarded damages totaling HK$25,000 (HK$15,000 general, HK$10,000 aggravated), interest, and a prohibitory injunction; exemplary damages and order for apology refused.

Citation
AU YEE MING IVAN v. NG FEI TIP
Parties
Plaintiff: Au Yee Ming Ivan; Defendant: Ng Fei Tip
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 August 2010
Case Number
DCCJ4595/2008
Procedural Posture
Defamation (slander) / Judgment Delivered After Trial (district Court)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff (defendant liable for slander)
Legal Topics
Slander, Justification, Fair Comment, Qualified Privilege, Withdrawal of Admissions/consent Orders, Aggravated Damages, Exemplary Damages, Injunction
Source Language
EN
Defamation Civil Procedure Remedies (injunction, Damages) Company/owners' Corporation Governance Slander Justification Fair Comment Qualified Privilege +4 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Au Yee Ming Ivan

Plaintiff

Ng Fei Tip

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (slander) / Judgment Delivered After Trial (district Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the spoken statement at owners' meeting bore a defamatory meaning
  2. 2 Whether statement was actionable per se under Defamation Ordinance s23
  3. 3 Validity and withdrawal of admissions in a consent order and whether leave to withdraw should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the pre-trial written concessions in the consent order were binding and refused the late withdrawal absent exceptional circumstances; the spoken Statement was defamatory in its natural and ordinary meaning as imputing incompetence/unsuitability in the plaintiff's office and was actionable per s23 DO; defendant's pleas of justification and fair comment failed for want of proper particularisation and evidential support and were rejected; defendant held liable and awarded damages totaling HK$25,000 (HK$15,000 general, HK$10,000 aggravated), interest, and a prohibitory injunction; exemplary damages and order for apology refused.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff (defendant liable for slander)

Orders

  • Defendant Ng Fei Tip to pay Plaintiff damages of HK$25,000 with interest: half-judgment rate from date of writ to date of order and thereafter full judgment rate until payment
  • Injunction restraining defendant (and agents) from publishing the Statement or similar defamatory words of the Plaintiff