RADIO TELEVISION HONG KONG PROGRAMME STAFF UNION AND ANOTHER v. COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY

RADIO TELEVISION HONG KONG PROGRAMME STAFF UNION AND ANOTHER v. COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY

The Court of Appeal held that the Episode was properly classified as a PVP (satire falls within para 17); however the Authority’s adverse findings were flawed in key respects: the Authority misapplied para 1A by failing to identify and properly assess the factual content requiring pre‑broadcast verification and by relying improperly on post‑broadcast materials (findings of breach in respect of Remarks A and B were quashed as unsupportable), and the Authority failed to take into account relevant factors (invitations to the Police) when finding a breach of para 17(d) (that finding was quashed); by majority the Court also quashed the Authority’s finding under para 2(b) in respect of the...

Citation
[2024] HKCA 845
Parties
1st Applicant: Radio Television Hong Kong Programme Staff Union; 2nd Applicant: The Hong Kong Journalists Association; Respondent: Communications Authority
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 September 2024
Case Number
CACV584/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (administrative Law) on Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Court of Appeal: Appeal of Communications Authority (CACV 579/2021) dismissed; applicants' appeal (CACV 584/2021) allowed in part — Authority's findings under Chapter 9 para 1A (Remark B), para 17(d) and Chapter 3 para 2(b) set aside/quashed; declaratory relief and certiorari granted as to those findings; remainder...
Legal Topics
Code of Practice, Satire, Personal View Programmes (pvp), Editorial Verification (1 A), Impartiality and Range of Views (17(d)), Denigration/discrimination (2(b)), Standing, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Broadcasting Regulation Administrative Law Constitutional Law Media Law Freedom of Expression Code of Practice Satire Personal View Programmes (pvp) +5 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Radio Television Hong Kong Programme Staff Union

1st Applicant

The Hong Kong Journalists Association

2nd Applicant

Communications Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (administrative Law) on Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Episode was correctly classified as a Personal View Programme (PVP) under Chapter 9, para 17 of the Code
  2. 2 Whether the Authority correctly found breach of Chapter 9, para 1A (duty to make reasonable efforts to ensure factual accuracy) in respect of Remarks A and B
  3. 3 Whether the Authority correctly found breach of Chapter 9, para 17(d) (need for a sufficiently broad range of views in a series of PVPs)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Episode was properly classified as a PVP (satire falls within para 17); however the Authority’s adverse findings were flawed in key respects: the Authority misapplied para 1A by failing to identify and properly assess the factual content requiring pre‑broadcast verification and by relying improperly on post‑broadcast materials (findings of breach in respect of Remarks A and B were quashed as unsupportable), and the Authority failed to take into account relevant factors (invitations to the Police) when finding a breach of para 17(d) (that finding was quashed); by majority the Court also quashed the Authority’s finding under para 2(b) in respect of the...

Court Disposition

Court of Appeal: Appeal of Communications Authority (CACV 579/2021) dismissed; applicants' appeal (CACV 584/2021) allowed in part — Authority's findings under Chapter 9 para 1A (Remark B), para 17(d) and Chapter 3 para 2(b) set aside/quashed; declaratory relief and certiorari granted as to those findings; remainder...

Orders

  • Dismiss the Authority's appeal CACV 579/2021
  • Allow applicants' appeal CACV 584/2021 in part: set aside the Authority's finding that RTHK breached Chapter 9 para 1A in respect of Remark B