黃衞中 對 陳純妮及另三人

黃衞中 對 陳純妮及另三人

Although the relief claimed is likely within the District Court's monetary and remedial jurisdiction and the issues are not inherently complex, the High Court must retain the proceedings because of (1) the need to maintain and if necessary modify existing restrictive/filing orders previously made by the High Court,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1641
Parties
Plaintiff: WONG WAI CHUNG (黃衞中); Defendant: CHAN SHUN NI (陳純妮); Defendant: LEUNG CHUNG CHEONG (梁中昌); Defendant: CHEN KWAN LAP, LAFORCE (陳君立); Defendant: CHEUNG SIU HONG (張紹康); Defendant: anonymous (fictitious name for fourth defendant); Defendant: TO KAM TIM (杜金添) alias TIM KAM; Defendant: LUK YAU TONG (陸有棠) alias LUK NGAI (陸毅); Defendant: KWAN KAI HING (關啓興); Defendant: LING TIM KWAI (凌添貴) alias BENNY LING; Defendant: KWONG BING FAI (江炳輝); Defendant: CHEUNG MING HANG (張明行) alias "章銘星"; Defendant: CHEUNG MING TUNG (張明東) alias COUSIN TUNG (東表哥); Defendant: TO MAN CHUNG (杜文聰); Defendant: LAU MAN KWONG (劉文廣); Defendant: LAI TIN SING (賴天成); Defendant: LAM EVE; Defendant: 馮笑萍 (化名“喊萍笑萍”); Defendant: NG WANG YAM (伍宏欽); Defendant: LAU KAM KEUNG (劉金强); Defendant: HO LIK KEI (何力驥); Defendant: HEUNG TO MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION LIMITED (香島中學校友會有限公司) trading as HEUNG TO MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION (香島中學校友會)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 August 2020
Case Number
HCA851/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation and Related Injunctive Relief) / Case Management / Interlocutory (application on Transfer Jurisdiction Considered)
Outcome
Proceedings to continue in the High Court; modification to remove references to the eighth defendant; previous restrictive and filing orders to be maintained; timetable varied and next case management hearing listed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Proceedings to District Court, Inherent Jurisdiction to Make Restrictive Orders, Restrictive/ancillary Injunctions and Gag Orders, Case Management and Scheduling
Source Language
ch
Defamation Civil Procedure Injunctions Court Jurisdiction Transfer of Proceedings to District Court Inherent Jurisdiction to Make Restrictive Orders Restrictive/ancillary Injunctions and Gag Orders Case Management and Scheduling

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WONG WAI CHUNG (黃衞中)

Plaintiff

CHAN SHUN NI (陳純妮)

Defendant

LEUNG CHUNG CHEONG (梁中昌)

Defendant

CHEN KWAN LAP, LAFORCE (陳君立)

Defendant

CHEUNG SIU HONG (張紹康)

Defendant

anonymous (fictitious name for fourth defendant)

Defendant

TO KAM TIM (杜金添) alias TIM KAM

Defendant

LUK YAU TONG (陸有棠) alias LUK NGAI (陸毅)

Defendant

KWAN KAI HING (關啓興)

Defendant

LING TIM KWAI (凌添貴) alias BENNY LING

Defendant

KWONG BING FAI (江炳輝)

Defendant

CHEUNG MING HANG (張明行) alias "章銘星"

Defendant

CHEUNG MING TUNG (張明東) alias COUSIN TUNG (東表哥)

Defendant

TO MAN CHUNG (杜文聰)

Defendant

LAU MAN KWONG (劉文廣)

Defendant

LAI TIN SING (賴天成)

Defendant

LAM EVE

Defendant

馮笑萍 (化名“喊萍笑萍”)

Defendant

NG WANG YAM (伍宏欽)

Defendant

LAU KAM KEUNG (劉金强)

Defendant

HO LIK KEI (何力驥)

Defendant

HEUNG TO MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION LIMITED (香島中學校友會有限公司) trading as HEUNG TO MIDDLE SCHOOL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION (香島中學校友會)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation and Related Injunctive Relief) / Case Management / Interlocutory (application on Transfer Jurisdiction Considered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings should be transferred from the High Court to the District Court under District Court Ordinance s43
  2. 2 Whether the relief sought (including injunctions and damages) is likely within District Court monetary jurisdiction (HK$3,000,000)
  3. 3 Whether the case involves important or complex questions requiring retention in the High Court

Ratio Decidendi

Although the relief claimed is likely within the District Court's monetary and remedial jurisdiction and the issues are not inherently complex, the High Court must retain the proceedings because of (1) the need to maintain and if necessary modify existing restrictive/filing orders previously made by the High Court, and (2) the unresolved and potentially complex question whether the District Court possesses the inherent jurisdiction to make equivalent restrictive orders; consequently the case should continue in the High Court for effective case management.

Court Disposition

Proceedings to continue in the High Court; modification to remove references to the eighth defendant; previous restrictive and filing orders to be maintained; timetable varied and next case management hearing listed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Modify earlier orders to delete references to the eighth defendant whose claim was terminated on 8 July 2016
  • Maintain existing restrictive injunctions and the 2020 restriction on filing; consider modification or new restrictive orders if necessary