OPG HUMAN RESOURCES LTD v, APPLE DAILY LTD AND ANOTHER

OPG HUMAN RESOURCES LTD v, APPLE DAILY LTD AND ANOTHER

The court held that it was not plain and obvious that the plaintiff's articles could not be protected as compilations or that no arguable case of infringement existed, so the strike out against the 2nd–4th defendants was refused (though the pleading on compilation was deficient and remediable); however the plaintiff had no positive case linking the 1st defendant to the alleged online publications, so the claim against the 1st defendant was struck out and dismissed. The consolidation relief was denied but the court ordered both actions to be tried by the same judge and reserved sequencing to the trial judge.

Citation
OPG HUMAN RESOURCES LTD v, APPLE DAILY LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: OPG HUMAN RESOURCES LTD; 1st Defendant: APPLE DAILY LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: ATNEXT LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 November 2010
Case Number
HCA481/2009
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement (news Articles) / Interlocutory: Striking Out and Consolidation Applications Heard in Chambers
Outcome
Part of striking out application granted (against 1st defendant) and part dismissed (against 2nd–4th defendants); consolidation not ordered but both actions to be tried by same judge; costs orders made.
Legal Topics
Copyright Subsistence, Compilation Copyright, Textual Copying, Striking Out Applications, Consolidation and Case Management, Abuse of Process, Joinder/holding Company Liability
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Copyright Civil Procedure Copyright Subsistence Compilation Copyright Textual Copying Striking Out Applications Consolidation and Case Management +2 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OPG HUMAN RESOURCES LTD

Plaintiff

APPLE DAILY LIMITED

1st Defendant

ATNEXT LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement (news Articles) / Interlocutory: Striking Out and Consolidation Applications Heard in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether copyright can subsist in compilations of news and press information
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's articles amount to compilations attracting copyright protection
  3. 3 Whether the Statement of Claim adequately pleaded compilation as a basis for copyright

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it was not plain and obvious that the plaintiff's articles could not be protected as compilations or that no arguable case of infringement existed, so the strike out against the 2nd–4th defendants was refused (though the pleading on compilation was deficient and remediable); however the plaintiff had no positive case linking the 1st defendant to the alleged online publications, so the claim against the 1st defendant was struck out and dismissed. The consolidation relief was denied but the court ordered both actions to be tried by the same judge and reserved sequencing to the trial judge.

Court Disposition

Part of striking out application granted (against 1st defendant) and part dismissed (against 2nd–4th defendants); consolidation not ordered but both actions to be tried by same judge; costs orders made.

Orders

  • Statement of Claim as against the 1st defendant is struck out and the action against the 1st defendant is dismissed with an order nisi that the plaintiff pays the 1st defendant the costs of the action and the application, to be taxed if not agreed.
  • The 2nd to 4th defendants' application to strike out the Statement of Claim and to dismiss the action is dismissed with an order nisi that the 2nd to 4th defendants pay the plaintiff 80% of the costs of the application, to be taxed if not agreed.