- 19 A B A tort of defamation is justiciable in the search for “the comfortable B equilibrium”22 between the limits of the tort of defamation vis-à-vis an C D internet search engine and the competing interest of freedom of expression and publication. Mr McCoy SC says that against such C D backdrop this court should instantly grant leave to appeal, and he fears E F that without approval/disapproval of the Decision by the Court of Appeal it will become lost in what he has described as the “wilderness of the first E F instance judgments”. G H G 36. On the other hand, Mr Ng has submitted the fact that this is a H rapidly developing area of the law does not aid Google Inc because the I J criteria for obtaining leave to serve out of jurisdiction merely requires a plaintiff to show he has a good arguable case that falls within the I J ground(s) under Order 11 rule 1(1) of the RHC, and to satisfy the court K L there is a serious question to be tried on the merits of the claim. Indeed, Mr Ng has submitted that rapid legal development provides all the more K L reason for any novel points to be determined in their factual context to be M N elicited at trial. He reminds that Fevaworks Solutions Ltd concerned an appeal after trial rather than an interlocutory ruling, and the appellate M N courts in that case had the benefit of the factual findings made by the first O instance court to put their exposition of the law in context. P P 37. Q R O Even though I can see the force of Mr Ng’s arguments, and (as seen from the above discussion) I am not quite persuaded that Bleyer necessarily raises reasonable prospects of tilting the balance against my Q R conclusion that Yeung has established a good arguable case, I have come S T to the view that it is inappropriate for this court to make an unseemly 22 para 185 of the Decision S T U U V V