ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS v. FEVAWORKS SOLUTIONS AND ANOTHER

ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS v. FEVAWORKS SOLUTIONS AND ANOTHER

Leave to appeal was refused because the matter was at an interlocutory stage inappropriate for appellate determination of novel legal issues, there was no reasonable prospect of success given the possibility the defendant was an innocent disseminator, and the balance of convenience favoured the defendants.

Citation
ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS v. FEVAWORKS SOLUTIONS AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Oriental Press Group Limited; 2nd Plaintiff: Oriental Daily Publisher Limited; 3rd Plaintiff: The Sun News Publisher Limited; 4th Plaintiff: Ma Ching Kwan; Defendant: Fevaworks Solutions Limited; 1st Defendant: Fevaworks Solutions Limited (trading as ALIVE! MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS); 2nd Defendant: ALIVE! MEDIA & COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 November 2009
Case Number
HCA597/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation/interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Stage Application for Leave to Appeal Refused
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Innocent Dissemination, Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments, Publication on Internet, Balance of Convenience
Source Language
EN
Defamation Civil Procedure Internet/isp Liability Innocent Dissemination Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments Publication on Internet Balance of Convenience

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oriental Press Group Limited

1st Plaintiff

Oriental Daily Publisher Limited

2nd Plaintiff

The Sun News Publisher Limited

3rd Plaintiff

Ma Ching Kwan

4th Plaintiff

Fevaworks Solutions Limited

Defendant

Fevaworks Solutions Limited (trading as ALIVE! MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS)

1st Defendant

ALIVE! MEDIA & COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation/interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Stage Application for Leave to Appeal Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted at interlocutory stage
  2. 2 Whether defendant can be liable for unintentional publication/innocent dissemination
  3. 3 Whether precedent in Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd applies to an allegedly ignorant defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the matter was at an interlocutory stage inappropriate for appellate determination of novel legal issues, there was no reasonable prospect of success given the possibility the defendant was an innocent disseminator, and the balance of convenience favoured the defendants.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused
  • Costs to be paid to the defendants