Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Copyright

  • 7 Dec 2021

    CO, ANA MARIE W. v. JOSE MARIO EMMANUEL VIALIA SALVADOR, ET., AL. AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 3619
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA917/2019

    The appeal was dismissed because it was filed almost 14 months out of time and no extension was granted on established criteria; further, the substantive claim against the 2nd and 3rd Defendants disclosed no reasonable cause of action because no duty of care arose from the defendants' prosecutorial or policing decisions and the plaintiff had no copyright in the discovered case documents, so the strike‑out order was properly upheld.

  • 14 Jan 2019

    UNIVERSAL MUSIC LTD v. NEWAY MUSIC LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    [2019] HKCFI 61
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1738/2017

    The defendants' defence re s.156(3)-(4) was an abuse of process because those issues had been decided in the prior discharge decision; the defendants unreasonably challenged the plaintiff's ownership; accordingly the application to vary costs was dismissed and indemnity costs (with certificate for two counsel) were awarded to the plaintiff for the action and for the application.

  • 13 Feb 2017

    CHAN SHU MOON v. DIRECTOR OF BUILDINGS

    Citation
    CHAN SHU MOON v. DIRECTOR OF BUILDINGS
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCMP2408/2016

    DCO s47B(2) is inapplicable because it authorises orders against non‑parties only; the court has jurisdiction under Norwich Pharmacal and grants disclosure of the Report and identified witness statements to the plaintiff subject to (a) the plaintiff's confidentiality/use undertaking and (b) redaction for parts legitimately covered by legal professional privilege (paras 6.9–6.71 and appendix XXI), with liberty to apply on privilege, and orders that the plaintiff pay the costs of the application.

  • 28 May 2015

    TURNER ENTERTAINMENT NETWORKS ASIA, INC. FOR MUSE COMMUNICATIONS CO LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

    Citation
    TURNER ENTERTAINMENT NETWORKS ASIA, INC. FOR MUSE COMMUNICATIONS CO LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV259/2012

    The Court held that "use" in ss15(1)(b) and (ba) of the Inland Revenue Ordinance is to be given a broad, non‑technical meaning (capable of including exhibition where that is the manner of deployment), and that s15(1)(ba) therefore covers licence fees received for the use outside Hong Kong of copyright/media works; the appellant's narrow technical and exclusivity arguments failed. The technical costs were payments for services and not within the deeming provisions and were excluded.

  • 2 Apr 2015

    SMART TRIKE MNF PTE LTD AND OTHERS v. CHIU SUI CHUN AND OTHERS

    Citation
    SMART TRIKE MNF PTE LTD AND OTHERS v. CHIU SUI CHUN AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA847/2013

    Defendants discharged evidential burden that 1st plaintiff's central management and control is in Singapore; 2nd plaintiff is a nominal dormant company unable to pay; 3rd plaintiff is resident abroad; counterclaims do not displace the court's discretion to order security; accordingly security for costs of HK$1,000,000 ordered from 1st to 3rd plaintiffs up to exchange of witness statements, proceedings stayed until provided, with dismissal available on default and undertaking to abandon counterclaims if security not paid.

  • 3 Jan 2011

    APPLE DAILY LTD v. ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS

    Citation
    APPLE DAILY LTD v. ORIENTAL PRESS GROUP LTD AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA1396/2009

    Leave to appeal was refused because the intended appeal did not have a reasonable prospect of success; the Statement of Claim, though inadequate on a compilation copyright case, was not incurable and could be amended rather than struck out; exercising the court's costs discretion under amended Order 62, the plaintiff was ordered to bear the costs of the striking out application subject to a one-third reduction.

  • 30 Sept 2009

    LEE YUEN HOUSEWARES CO LTD v. STAR-TARGET INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    LEE YUEN HOUSEWARES CO LTD v. STAR-TARGET INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LTD AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA710/2007

    Summary judgment was refused because genuine factual disputes and plausible defences existed as to the scoop (possible prior market availability and supplier sourcing), the tea bag holder (inability to compare lost original drawings with pleaded work and contested chronology), and the timer (issue of alleged joint ownership requiring factual resolution); the court therefore granted unconditional leave to the 1st defendant to defend rather than enter summary judgment.

  • 12 Aug 2009

    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. NG KING KUEN

    Citation
    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. NG KING KUEN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2488/2006

    Apply the White Book factors to each counsel fee item; reduce fees where work was disproportionate to the charges (drafting 15 similar defences and PTR attendances) but uphold full allowances where the Master found the time, complexity and preparation justified it (leading counsel's brief and refresher). The Review is dismissed and the original taxation adjustments are confirmed (specific reductions and disallowances as applied by the Master).

  • 12 Aug 2009

    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. 路華報紙社 (a firm)

    Citation
    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. 路華報紙社 (a firm)
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2500/2006

    The Master applied the White Book criteria, exercised discretion to disallow or reduce items where the work or time was not justified (notably reducing drafting fees for 15 defences and disallowing junior counsel fees) and upheld as reasonable the leading counsel's brief and refresher fees and specified PTR attendance allowances; the review of the taxation was dismissed and the original taxation adjustments were affirmed.

  • 12 Aug 2009

    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. 路華報紙社 (a firm)

    Citation
    CAPCOM CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. 路華報紙社 (a firm)
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2498/2006

    The Master applied the White Book factors to each challenged counsel item, reduced the drafting fee for 15 defences by approximately half (allowing $68,750 total, $4,583 each), allowed reduced sums for each PTR attendance ($7,500 allowed per PTR attendance item after taxing off $2,500), disallowed all junior counsel fees for the trial but allowed leading counsel's brief and refresher in full, and dismissed the review; costs were ordered to follow the event and a receiving party allowance of $8,300 was ordered to become absolute within 14 days.