In Chow Wing Kai (周榮佳) v Liang Jing (梁京) [2021] HKDC 609, Hong Kong District Judge Kent Yee applied the Stocker v Stocker [2020] AC 593 approach to a defamation case between two AIA Insurance Agents, and ruled in the Plaintiff’s favour, awarding general, aggravated and exemplary damages in the total sum of HK$300,000 against the Defendant.
Date of Judgment: 21 May 2021
“… Mr Lam makes a valid point against an over-analytical approach in interpreting the meanings of words appearing on social media such as Facebook and Twitter. He helpfully refers to a recent judgment of the UK Supreme Court in Stocker v Stocker [2020] AC 593 where Lord Kerr JSC (with whom Lord Reed DPSC, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin JJSC agreed) disapproved the trial judge’s dictionary approach (affirmed by the Court of Appeal) and explained the special features of publications on social media. I find his dictum including his citation of other decisions to be of particular relevance and use…
… In light of this authority, I agree with Mr Lam that I should put myself into the position of a social media user and take an impressionistic instead of analytical approach in ascribing meanings to the Words published by way of posts on social media…
… By the meanings of the 3rd Words, Mr Liang made grave allegations against Mr Chow in his profession. The threshold of seriousness is obviously met. I believe that the ordinary, reasonable and sensible person would possibly think less of Mr Chow personally by reason of the 3rd Words and they amount to an adverse reflection on the professional reputation of Mr Chow. Thus, I come to the conclusion that the 3rd Words are defamatory of Mr Chow…
… Mr Lam suggests… that the conduct of Mr Liang in this suit is malicious and outrageous… His conduct could be said to be outrageous and I agree that he had rubbed salt into the wounds of Mr Chow…
… For the reasons given, I conclude that the 3rd Words bore defamatory imputations referrable to Mr Chow and Mr Liang is unable to establish the defence of justification and fair comment. Judgment should be entered against Mr Liang…
… Mr Chow should be entitled to the following reliefs: (1) An injunction order restraining Mr Liang (whether by himself or via agents) from publishing, procuring and/or participating in the publication of the 3rd Words or similar words defamatory of and/or containing false allegations concerning Mr Chow; (2) An order compelling Mr Liang to immediately and permanently remove and cause to be removed the 3rd Words and all similar words defamatory of or containing false allegations concerning Mr Chow from all websites or other public platforms within his control; (3) Mr Liang do pay Mr Chow a sum of HK$250,000 as general damages and a sum of HK$50,000 as aggravated and exemplary damages; (4) Interests on the said two sums at judgment rate until payment; and (5) Costs of this action, including any costs previously reserved, to be paid to Mr Chow by Mr Liang, to be taxed if not agreed with certificate for counsel (on a nisi basis)…
… It remains for me to thank both Mr Lam and Mr Lo for their able submissions and helpful assistance in this matter…
(Kent Yee)
District Judge
Barrister Mr Kenneth Lam, instructed by LCP Solicitors, for the plaintiff Chow Wing Kai (周榮佳)
Barrister Mr Benny Lo, instructed by Au Yeung, Cheng, Ho & Tin Solicitors, for the defendant Liang Jing (梁京)
Source: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/word/vetted/other/en/2019/DCCJ001258_2019.docx
Hong Kong Defamation Law 