Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Defamation ordinance s.24

Legal area

Court

6 Nov 2020

XU YING v. XU WEIHONG

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2826
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2650/2017

Leave to appeal was refused because the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success: the Main Decision correctly held that Gateway (f) requires a real and substantial tort in Hong Kong and there was no convincing evidence of substantial publication or meaningful damage; the discretion under Gateway (b) was properly exercised against the plaintiff; the malicious falsehood claim did not disclose a serious issue to be tried; Hong Kong was not shown to be the clearly appropriate forum; deliberate material non-disclosure in the ex parte application justified refusing re-granting of leave.
7 Aug 2020

XU YING v. XU WEIHONG

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1955
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2650/2017

Leave for service out of jurisdiction was set aside because plaintiff failed to show a good arguable case of substantial publication in Hong Kong (so no real and substantial tort in jurisdiction), failed to plead or adduce sufficient evidence of pecuniary damage required for malicious falsehood under s.24 DO (no serious issue to be tried), Hong Kong is not clearly and distinctly the forum conveniens given evidence of Mainland publication, and the ex parte application contained deliberate material non-disclosures; accordingly leave was discharged and not re-granted.