- 10 A B A 31. Considering the materials before me, I found that it is seriously B arguable whether the Information obtained during the interviews are C D capable of being and, in fact, confidential in nature. So are the questions of whether the duty of confidence existed as well as whether the consent to C D the publication of the Information was limited to the purpose of the E F G graduation project of Solabarrieta or extended to effectively the world at large through the internet. F G Proper plaintiff H H 32. I E Mr Hughes argued that the proper plaintiff should not be Chor but his wife. The essence of the argument was that Solabarrieta liaised I with Chor’s wife with a view to her being the star of the interview, namely, J K the “tai tai”. It was Chor’s own suggestion that he be interviewed as well. He was featured in the interviews to a limited extent. In the circumstances, J K Mr Hughes argued that the duty of confidence, if any, was owed not to L L Chor. M N M 33. There is conflict of evidence as to whether it was Chor’s N initiative that he also be interviewed. In any event, the nature of the O P Q R S Information was such that interest in it is not peculiar to the individual providing it, be that Chor or his wife, during the interviews. The Information concerns Chor’s wife as much as it concerns Chor. The permission or even invitation to film the social gathering of the Chor couple was one from Chor’s wife as much as that from Chor. 34. It is in my view seriously arguable that the duty of confidence O P Q R S does not arise merely between the parties in actual liaison as if it were a T T U U V V