Read the full judgment text of FAMV No. 22 of 2016 on BabelCite. This Court of Final Appeal judgment was delivered on 23 August 2016 before Ribeiro PJ, Tang PJ, Fok PJ.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – defamation – Reynolds privilege – appellate intervention – jury verdict – great general or public importance – The plaintiff claimed defamation from a newspaper editorial; a jury found two defamatory meanings and rejected justification and fair comment, awarding HK$500,000 damages – The trial judge dismissed the defence of qualified privilege – The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the defence established – The plaintiff sought leave to appeal on four questions: (1) proper appellate approach to Reynolds privilege; (2) whether personal opinions are covered by Reynolds privilege; (3) whether the trial judge may summarise the 'essence' of jury meanings; (4) how the judge is bound by jury findings – The Court of Final Appeal found Question 1 academic because the judge erred in principle irrespective of the test; Questions 2 and 4 were new points not raised below; Question 3 was not involved – No basis for leave under the 'or otherwise' limb – Application dismissed with costs.
Legal issues: Leave to appeal on grounds of great general or public importance and 'or otherwise'
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Cites 2 cases