- 3 A A B II. LEGAL PRINCIPLES B C 5. C The Order is an interlocutory order, and it is incumbent upon Google Inc to persuade this court to grant leave to appeal. D E Under section 14AA(4) of the High Court Ordinance Cap 4, leave to appeal shall not be granted unless the court is satisfied that the appeal has a D E reasonable prospect of success or there is some other reason in the F G interests of justice why the appeal should be heard. In SMSE v KL,1 Le Pichon JA pointed out that such leave to appeal is not lightly granted. F G Reasonable prospect of success involves the notion that the prospect of H I succeeding must be “reasonable” and therefore more than “fanciful”, without having to be “probable”.2 Furthermore, it is pertinent to bear in H I mind that even if there is a reasonable prospect of success on appeal, the J K court still retains a discretion whether to grant leave to appeal, although the fact that there is, ex hypothesi, a reasonable prospect of success would J K heavily influence the court’s exercise of discretion.3 L M N L III. DRAFT GROUNDS OF APPEAL 6. In the Draft Notice, Google Inc relies on four draft grounds M N of appeal. For the present purpose, Mr McCoy SC (and Ms Ngai with O P him), counsel for Google Inc, in his written skeleton submissions condensed them into three broad grounds, which I summarise as follows: (a) Q claimed I have erred in holding there is a good arguable case Q R 1 2 3 T P Ground 1 – no publication to third parties: Google Inc R S O [2009] 4 HKLRD 125 at p 129 see Ho Yuen Ki Winnie & Anor v Ho Hung Sun Stanley & anor HCA391/2006, A Cheung J (as he then was) (unreported, 25 May 2009) para 3, and HCMP1009/2009 (unreported, 24 August 2009) para 22 S T U U V V