 |
| District Court judge told fellow Filipinos have been particularly harsh on plaintiff |
A Filipina domestic
worker who has filed a personal injuries claim against her octogenarian former
employer has won the right not to have her full name disclosed in court-related
proceedings and documents, as well as in any report by the public or the media
on her case.
In a ruling
handed down on Friday, Nov. 3, Deputy District Court Judge David Chan allowed
the plaintiff to be named only as “CB” in all matters relating to the case she
filed against retired doctor, Bryan Drew Apthorp.
While Judge Chan
accepted that the order was a departure from the norm, he chose to exercise the
right of the court to issue an anonymity order, “as the interest of the private
lives so required.”
He cited the
possibility of CB being targeted for further victimization by “haters” in the
Filipino community and the public in general, as well as the devastating
effects the disclosure of her identity could have on her two daughters who are
unaware of the ongoing cases.
CB’s civil suit comes
at the close of two trials of the three sexual assault charges she filed
against 84-year-old Apthorp. The first resulted in his conviction, but after a
retrial ordered by the High Court on appeal, he was cleared of all charges.
The civil
proceedings started on Feb 5, 2021, and in the writ of summons, the parties’
names were revealed. However, during the criminal trials in Eastern Court which
ended in December last year, CB was referred only as “X”.
On October 5
this year, CB filed an application with the District Court, asking that her
full name be withheld from all court proceedings and documents, citing a number
of reasons, including the alleged “unforgiving and cynical” comments made by
the Filipino community against her during the criminal trial.
Those comments
were said to have added to the mental and emotional distress that she was
already suffering due to the traumas she experienced from the alleged indecent
assaults.
She also claimed
that the Filipino community in general is not very sympathetic to victims
of sexual assaults, and the same applies
to the Catholic community which she is part of.
Disclosing her
name in the instant case would just continue the victim-blaming and shaming she
has suffered, that she may choose to just discontinue her claim, she added.
CB also said
that while she is currently employed, putting her name out in public could be
fatal to her future career prospect in Hong Kong.
Finally, she
worried about the psychological effect on her daughters, aged 21 and 16 years
old, if they learned from news reports that their mother was subject to the
alleged indecent assaults and exploitation. She said she has not told her
daughters about the case.
No affidavit was
filed on behalf of Apthorp to oppose CB’s application. But in his written
submissions, the defendant’s counsel said the plaintiff failed to show that
there were exceptional circumstances that would warrant a deviation from the
principle of open justice. Neither did she explain the delay in filing her
application.
In his judgment,
Judge Chan emphasized that to deviate from the public nature of court
proceedings, it is essential for the applicant to show clearly the grounds that
would justify the issuance of an anonymity order.
The judge then said
he was not impressed by some of the arguments raised on CB’s behalf,
particularly that which said disclosing her identity would be fatal to her job
prospects. If this were the case, he said all employees suing their employers
in the Labour Tribunal should have the claimants’ names hidden.
Judge Chan also
dismissed CB’s claim that an anonymity order could ease the mental and
emotional distress she suffered from negative and derogatory comments during
the criminal proceedings.
“With or without
her name revealed, the upcoming trial could still be reported by the media, and
haters within the public/community/netizens are still going to express their
hatred.. and (she) could again be emotionally distressed,” said the judge.
However, he conceded
that having CB’s full identity revealed could heighten her distress as the
derogatory comments will then be directed at her, and the “more conservative
and/or extreme members of the public…would have a clear target for their shaming,
blaming, and discriminating.”
It did not
matter if the defendant was cleared of all criminal charges, added the judge,
as the nature of the sexual assault allegations in the case could expose the
plaintiff to further victimisation.
He also agreed
that seeing their mother’s name mentioned in connection with the alleged
indecent assaults could have a devastating effect on CB’s daughters.
“I see no reason
why they should be put in such position,” said the judge.
Judge Chan
ordered that the costs of the application be paid by the defendant to the
plaintiff, with certificate for counsel, to be taxed if not agreed. The plaintiff’s own costs should be taxed in
accordance with Legal Aid Regulations.
The plaintiff
was represented in court by Eric Shum and Yvonne Leung (on pro bono basis), on
instructions by Patricia Ho & Associates, as assigned by Legal Aid.
Edwin Choy, SC
and Jacky Ho, appeared for the defendant, as instructed by Haldanes.
.jpg)
