The documentary "For My Nineteen-Year-Old Me", which tracks the growth of many Yinghua girls' school students, caused social controversy. One of the interviewed girls, A Ling, wrote an article today, expressing that she did not want the film to be screened publicly, but the school did not respect it. Willingness, even refers to the consent signed by her parents has legal effect; another interviewed girl Charmaine mentioned that the consent was signed by herself.
Practicing barrister Lu Weixiong pointed out that if the person signing the consent form is under the legal age at the time of signing, the consent form has no legal effect; however, if it is signed by a parent or guardian, it will have legal effect.
However, he mentioned that if the consent form signed with parents or guardians only states that the film will be screened in the school, but it is now changed to a public screening, a separate consent form is required.
However, he pointed out that if the consent form states "publish in any form", there is a chance of "contradictory speech". deemed invalid.
▼Screenshot of "For Me at Nineteen"▼
+4
Injunction can be applied to court Costly litigation
Regarding the consent form for filming, Lu Weixiong stated that if the person who signed the consent form is a 12-year-old student, because he has not reached the legal age, the consent form has no legal effect. "Simply put, a child is 12 years old, without parents, If there is no guardian to sign, he can overturn it, because he is underage, and his signature may be deemed invalid.”
Director Maggie Cheung and five female students recorded in "For Me at Nineteen" returned to their alma mater, Ying Wa Girls' School, to attend the "For Me at Nineteen" Appreciation Conference.
(File photo/Photo by Chen Shunzhen)
Legally binding signature by parent or guardian
On the contrary, if the consent form is signed by parents or guardians, it is binding. "I want to emphasize that if a parent or guardian signs it, it will be binding. Even if the child is 12 years old at the time, if the parent or adult signs it for him, it will not be allowed. It can be said that I was 12 years old at the time, and I was not the one to sign it, so it doesn’t make sense.”
One of the interviewed girls, A Ling, wrote that her consent form was signed by her parents. After she expressed her disapproval of the documentary’s public screening, the school, director and producer once said that they had sought legal advice if she still wanted to stop it. There is a chance to be legally responsible, and she also pointed out that even if she did not sign any documents, her continued participation in filming after she became an adult is silent consent, which is legally binding.
Lu Weixiong responded, "There is no term in our law called silent consent, but there may be some clauses. If you object, you should submit it at a specified time. If you do not submit it at a specified time, it will be regarded as you have no objection." "He continued, to see if there are such clauses in the document, and to state how many years after signing, no objection can be deemed as consent.
Barrister Lu Weixiong.
(Photo provided by interviewee)
Pay attention to whether there is a "publish in any form" clause
Lu Weixiong said that if the parents or guardians signed it with the understanding that the documentary will only be screened in the school, but now it is open to the public, they need to sign another consent form.
However, it is worth noting that if the initial signed agreement states "publish in any form", it depends on whether someone has verbally promised that the relevant filming will only be screened in the school, and "verbal promises are binding." .
He bluntly said that this situation is more complicated, and there will be a situation of "contradictory words and noses". The signatory needs to prove that someone promised to only release it on campus, so that the consent form has a chance to be deemed invalid.
He pointed out that whether it is the interviewed students, parents or guardians, if they do not want the documentary to be screened publicly, they can apply to the court for an injunction order.
However, he reminded the public that the cost of litigation is high, and "no matter how confident you are in winning a lawsuit, there is a chance of losing it."
What controversy happened in "To Me at Nineteen"?
The two protagonist students who were photographed both said that they did not agree with the public release, click here for details.
What question did Ah Ling raise?
She believes that the school and the filming team did not respect the wishes of the students to oppose the release, and only cited legal explanations.
Click here for details.
For me at 19︱Li Huishi did not agree to the interview film compilation: I will not watch it and I don’t encourage you to watch it︱The two protagonists express their opposition to the release of A Ling’s 4-character text, which does not respect the wishes of students
