Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Slander

  • 29 Apr 2020

    YUEN MUI FONG v. LO KUT CHIE ALAN

    Citation
    [2020] HKCFI 652
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA711/2018

    Master accepted the plaintiff's uncontradicted viva voce and documentary evidence, found harassment and defamatory publications proved, held aggravated damages appropriate for harassment due to continued persecuting conduct despite injunctions, assessed HK$180,000 as fair compensation for harassment (including aggravated element) and HK$100,000 for defamation, declined separate aggravated damages for defamation and declined separate pre-judgment interest because delay was reflected in the awards.

  • 18 Oct 2017

    CHANG WA SHAN v. ESTHER CHAN PUI KWAN also known as CHAN PUI CHUN

    Citation
    CHANG WA SHAN v. ESTHER CHAN PUI KWAN also known as CHAN PUI CHUN
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV240/2015

    The Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to costs as the overall successful party but should be deprived of 30% of his costs to reflect the defendant's success on the issue of recovery of damages for republication covered by absolute privilege; granted certificate for three counsel for the appeal and two counsel for the trial; rejected limiting costs to District Court scale under s.43(3); set aside the lower court costs order and ordered the defendant to pay 70% of the costs of the appeal and 70% of the costs below and of the action.

  • 23 Jan 2015

    TSUI SANG HUNG SAMMY v. LUI HOK NANG

    Citation
    TSUI SANG HUNG SAMMY v. LUI HOK NANG
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ1985/2012

    Court found the published words, read in context, conveyed at most suspicion rather than a positive imputation of guilt for vote‑rigging or bribery and therefore did not satisfy the defamatory meaning alleged; the defendant did authorise publication but failed to prove justification or fair comment; on the primary finding that the words were not defamatory the plaintiff's claim fails and the action is dismissed.

  • 7 Sept 2011

    CHAN NGAN BING v. FUNG YEUK HUNG

    Citation
    CHAN NGAN BING v. FUNG YEUK HUNG
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA130/2009

    Court found that Chan proved nuisance from the air-conditioner (Issue A) for about three months and from the flower bed (Issue B) continuing since March 2002; awarded Chan HK$5,000 and HK$55,000 respectively. Court found no proven source for the alleged utility-area seepage (Issue C) and no sufficient proof of excessive noise (Issue D) or of property damage (Issue E). The court found that elements of malicious falsehood were made out against Chan in relation to repeated false statements about seepage (Issue G/H) and assessed Fung's damages at HK$55,000 general and HK$2,000 special; netting th…

  • 25 Aug 2010

    AU YEE MING IVAN v. NG FEI TIP

    Citation
    AU YEE MING IVAN v. NG FEI TIP
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ4595/2008

    The court held the pre-trial written concessions in the consent order were binding and refused the late withdrawal absent exceptional circumstances; the spoken Statement was defamatory in its natural and ordinary meaning as imputing incompetence/unsuitability in the plaintiff's office and was actionable per s23 DO; defendant's pleas of justification and fair comment failed for want of proper particularisation and evidential support and were rejected; defendant held liable and awarded damages totaling HK$25,000 (HK$15,000 general, HK$10,000 aggravated), interest, and a prohibitory injunction;…

  • 19 Dec 2007

    LEE YORK FAI v. YUE SHIN MAN ANNA

    Citation
    LEE YORK FAI v. YUE SHIN MAN ANNA
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV184/2007

    The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiff failed to plead the necessary connecting facts to show the defendant's words were published of him; the trial judge accepted the defendant's evidence that her words referred to volunteer distributors not the plaintiff and justification was established on the facts, so the plaintiff's pleaded case had no basis.

  • 20 Aug 2007

    YIU HON LAM v. CHAN YU CHUN

    Citation
    YIU HON LAM v. CHAN YU CHUN
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ5351/2005

    The publications (emails and oral statements) were defamatory and untrue but the Defendant established a prima facie occasion of qualified privilege and the Plaintiff failed to prove malice; accordingly the defence of qualified privilege succeeded and the Plaintiff\'s claim is dismissed, with a costs order against the Defendant to pay half the Plaintiff\'s costs.

  • 26 Jan 2006

    ESQUEL ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER v. TAL APPAREL LTD AND ANOTHER

    Citation
    ESQUEL ENTERPRISES LTD AND ANOTHER v. TAL APPAREL LTD AND ANOTHER
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV71/2005

    The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judge's discretion to stay the Hong Kong proceedings on forum non conveniens grounds: the Japanese defamation claims should be tried in Japan and the US defamation claims in the United States because the torts were committed there, the relevant patents and reputational interests lie there, and foreign patent/infringement issues are weighty factors. The order below was amended from a permanent stay to a stay of the action; no injustice to plaintiffs was shown that would outweigh the appropriateness of foreign fora.

  • 21 Dec 2005

    曾漢珠 v. 王國量

    Citation
    曾漢珠 v. 王國量
    Court
    District Court
    Case number
    DCCJ3917/2003

    The Student Forum was an occasion of qualified privilege. Although some alleged statements could be disparaging, the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant published them maliciously or recklessly to the level required to defeat privilege. The plaintiff also failed to prove the precise words as pleaded and failed to establish special damage where required. Therefore qualified privilege applied and the claim fails.

  • 19 Aug 2005

    LEE MAN KIN v. WANG MEI CHUN AND OTHERS

    Citation
    LEE MAN KIN v. WANG MEI CHUN AND OTHERS
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA2876/2003

    Court found the 1st defendant's oral statements at the Sub-Committee meeting were slanderous and the jointly circulated letter signed by defendants 1–6 was libellous of the plaintiff; defendants' defences of justification, qualified privilege and fair comment failed because key factual assertions were untrue and the court found malice/recklessness in publication; plaintiff awarded compensatory damages ($4,000 for the slander by the 1st defendant and $15,000 against each defendant for the libel); no aggravated damages awarded and no order as to costs (order nisi).