CHEN BIJUN v. SO YEE CHUN

CHEN BIJUN v. SO YEE CHUN

On the balance of credibility the court preferred D's evidence over P's, found that P was a subcontractor not an employee of D, drew an adverse inference from P's failure to call a material witness (Ah Pun), and concluded that D was not liable to P in the asserted capacity as employer; accordingly P's claim failed on liability.

Citation
CHEN BIJUN v. SO YEE CHUN
Parties
Plaintiff Injured Worker: P; Defendant Renovation Contractor: D; Premises Owner / Client: Chao
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 November 2016
Case Number
HCPI110/2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Negligence / Employment Status Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed on liability; judgment for Defendant.
Legal Topics
Employment Status (employee V Subcontractor), Vicarious Liability, Duty of Care, Quantum of Damages, Adverse Inference for Failure to Call Witness
Source Language
EN
Tort Employment Law Contract Law Personal Injury Evidence Employment Status (employee V Subcontractor) Vicarious Liability Duty of Care +2 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P

Plaintiff Injured Worker

D

Defendant Renovation Contractor

Chao

Premises Owner / Client

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Negligence / Employment Status Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether P was an employee of D or an independent subcontractor
  2. 2 Whether D breached common law and statutory duties giving rise to liability for P's injuries
  3. 3 Whether causal liability for the accident and resulting damages lies with D

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of credibility the court preferred D's evidence over P's, found that P was a subcontractor not an employee of D, drew an adverse inference from P's failure to call a material witness (Ah Pun), and concluded that D was not liable to P in the asserted capacity as employer; accordingly P's claim failed on liability.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed on liability; judgment for Defendant.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim for damages dismissed.