LI TAN LAP AND ANOTHER v. LEE WAI HAN

HCA 156/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ACTION NO. 156 OF 2002

____________

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is an appeal from a Master's decision on an application for further and better particulars.

2. The claim is a claim in defamation in which the defendant has pleaded that the words said are true and are justified. When asked for particulars as to the truth and justification of the words, no particulars have been given other than to assert that the words themselves are true.

3. With the greatest respect to Mr Chan, he has proceeded on a misunderstanding of the nature of particulars. There are a number of facts alleged in the words for which no particulars are given.

4. By way of example only and not comprehensively dealing with the matter, in paragraph 4(a) of the statement of claim an allegation is made that the defendant was not given enough sleeping time by the drama team and that her manager protested that. There are no particulars given of those facts. An allegation is made that a threat of violence was made by the 1st plaintiff. There are no particulars as to the date or place or time at which that allegation was made. In paragraph 4(b) an allegation is made that other actors have received money for so-called extra episodes. No particulars are given as to which actors received money for which extra episodes.

5. If the defendant is to say that the words complained of are true, she will have to prove that they are true. She will have to prove that by calling appropriate evidence and there are no particulars of the evidence that might be called.

6. I accept that it is not necessary to set out the evidence upon which the defendant will rely, but it is necessary to set out the particulars. An example of the extent to which particulars must be set out is contained in Wootton v Sievier [1913] 3 KB 499. A reading of that case should demonstrate to the defendant's advisors the extent to which they need to go.

7. I am satisfied that the Master was quite correct in ordering further particulars. There will be an order that the particulars must be supplied within 14 days of today. Costs on the appeal to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs.

Discussion re costs

8. The situation in respect of the appeal is perfectly plain. It was a case which I did not need to call on the plaintiff's counsel. This is a case where costs must be paid on the appeal.