NG CHIU MUI AND ANOTHER v. LO CHO YAN

NG CHIU MUI AND ANOTHER v. LO CHO YAN

The court held that interviews conducted under s.183(1) SFO were compelled, the SFC was exercising a quasi‑judicial function, and therefore records of those interviews attract absolute privilege; consequently a claim in malicious falsehood based on those records is legally unsustainable and the statements of claim must be struck out.

Citation
NG CHIU MUI AND ANOTHER v. LO CHO YAN
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Ng Chiu Mui; 2nd Plaintiff: Law Kai Yee; Defendant (hca 768/2010): Shum Lik Keung; Defendant (hca 769/2010): Lo Cho Yan
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 August 2011
Case Number
HCA769/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (malicious Falsehood) / Application to Strike Out; Judgment on Strike Out in Chambers
Outcome
Statements of claim struck out and actions dismissed against Shum Lik Keung (HCA 768/2010) and Lo Cho Yan (HCA 769/2010).
Legal Topics
Malicious Falsehood, Absolute Privilege, Res Judicata, Disciplinary Proceedings Under SFO, Strike Out Application
Source Language
EN
Civil Litigation Defamation Securities Regulation Administrative Law Malicious Falsehood Absolute Privilege Res Judicata Disciplinary Proceedings Under SFO +1 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ng Chiu Mui

1st Plaintiff

Law Kai Yee

2nd Plaintiff

Shum Lik Keung

Defendant (hca 768/2010)

Lo Cho Yan

Defendant (hca 769/2010)

Procedural Posture

Civil (malicious Falsehood) / Application to Strike Out; Judgment on Strike Out in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements made in SFC interviews and recorded in interview records are protected by absolute privilege
  2. 2 Whether the malicious falsehood claim based on those records is barred by res judicata
  3. 3 Whether the SFC was exercising a quasi‑judicial function and witnesses were compellable

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that interviews conducted under s.183(1) SFO were compelled, the SFC was exercising a quasi‑judicial function, and therefore records of those interviews attract absolute privilege; consequently a claim in malicious falsehood based on those records is legally unsustainable and the statements of claim must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Statements of claim struck out and actions dismissed against Shum Lik Keung (HCA 768/2010) and Lo Cho Yan (HCA 769/2010).

Orders

  • Statement of claim in HCA 768/2010 struck out
  • Action against Shum Lik Keung (HCA 768/2010) dismissed