My Take | Ruling that allows harassment victims to sue has far-reaching implications

The ability of victims of harassment to sue in Hong Kong’s courts has long been open to question. But not any more. A landmark judgment of the city’s top court has confirmed, for the first time, that people who suffer cyberbullying, email campaigns or other forms of oppressive behaviour can bring a civil case.

The ruling broke new ground, not just for Hong Kong but for the common law world, notably in establishing a new right for companies to seek an injunction to prevent the harassment of their staff. It has far-reaching implications.

When delivering the judgment in January, the Court of Final Appeal highlighted the “important and novel” legal issues raised in a case brought by Sir Elly Kadoorie and Sons Ltd against Samantha Bradley, the former head of the company’s legal department. A subsequent issue concerning the costs of the case was ruled on last week.

The former staff member is alleged by Kadoorie to have sent more than 500 emails, mostly containing repetitive, hostile, serious and untrue allegations to the company, its officers, employees, and legal representatives between December 2020 and May 2022. Kadoorie took legal action seeking an injunction to restrain such conduct and damages, accusing their former employee of harassment. Bradley contested the action and the case is yet to be decided.

But however the company’s claim is ultimately resolved, the broader legal issues raised by it are significant. The top court took the rare step of ruling on them in an interim judgment. This included the question of whether the right to sue for harassment in Hong Kong even exists.

The city does not have legislation dealing generally with harassment. But over the last 13 years, the courts have, in 24 cases, accepted a claim can be brought under the common law. In another eight, this was considered arguable and in two it was found not to exist. As the top court recognised, the position was “not entirely clear”.