ASHLEY MIDDLETON AND ANOTHER v. CHENG KING YING AND ANOTHER

ASHLEY MIDDLETON AND ANOTHER v. CHENG KING YING AND ANOTHER

The court awarded general and future loss damages because the injury and its effects were established; however it refused to treat a possible commission and consequent longer Army career as a sufficiently probable source of actuarial future economic loss, finding that any loss of that chance was speculative. Special damages were allowed as claimed including the extra cost of the amah. Interest and costs were ordered as specified.

Citation
ASHLEY MIDDLETON AND ANOTHER v. CHENG KING YING AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: Ashley Middleton; 2nd Plaintiff: Jennifer Jane Middleton; 1st Defendant: Cheng King Ying; 2nd Defendant: Fling Kai Chong
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 April 1982
Case Number
HCA7211/1980
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Assessment of Damages / Assessment of Damages (high Court Assessment)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs; damages awarded in the total sum ordered with interest and costs as specified.
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, General Damages, Special Damages, Future Loss of Earnings, Causation, Interest on Damages, Costs
Source Language
EN
Personal Injury Tort Damages Law Civil Procedure Assessment of Damages General Damages Special Damages Future Loss of Earnings +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashley Middleton

1st Plaintiff

Jennifer Jane Middleton

2nd Plaintiff

Cheng King Ying

1st Defendant

Fling Kai Chong

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Assessment of Damages / Assessment of Damages (high Court Assessment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Quantification of general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities
  2. 2 Assessment of loss of future earning capacity and whether speculative
  3. 3 Recovery of agreed and contested special damages including cost of amah

Ratio Decidendi

The court awarded general and future loss damages because the injury and its effects were established; however it refused to treat a possible commission and consequent longer Army career as a sufficiently probable source of actuarial future economic loss, finding that any loss of that chance was speculative. Special damages were allowed as claimed including the extra cost of the amah. Interest and costs were ordered as specified.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs; damages awarded in the total sum ordered with interest and costs as specified.

Orders

  • General damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities awarded $50,000
  • Loss of future earning capacity awarded $30,000