MR RAVI GIDUMAL AND OTHERS v. DR RICHARD WING CHIU AND ANOTHER

MR RAVI GIDUMAL AND OTHERS v. DR RICHARD WING CHIU AND ANOTHER

The court directed that the joint instructions must set out all alternative factual scenarios the parties may contend regarding P2 and P3's work capacity; the forensic accounting experts must state whether they can quantify loss under each scenario, provide methodology and reasons or explain inability to do so, identify areas of agreement and disagreement, and address a range of notional retirement ages; the experts must assume two alternative start dates for P3 (1 June 2009 and 1 January 2012) so the court can decide at trial; parties must finalise and dispatch joint instructions within specified short time limits; costs of the application are to be costs in the cause (nisi).

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 228
Parties
1st Plaintiff (acting as Administrator of the Estate of Zubin Mahtani Gidumal): MR RAVI GIDUMAL; 2nd Plaintiff: MR RAVI GIDUMAL; 3rd Plaintiff: MS SHALINI MAHTANI; 1st Defendant: DR RICHARD WING CHIU; 2nd Defendant: MATILDA INTERNATIONAL HOSPITAL
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 January 2019
Case Number
HCPI411/2012
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries (medical Negligence) / Case Management Directions for Joint Expert (forensic Accounting) Report; Paper Disposal Decision
Outcome
Application for directions granted in part; parties ordered to finalise joint instructions and experts directed on scope of joint report; costs nisi (costs in the cause).
Legal Topics
Joint Expert Report, Quantification of Future Loss, Work Capacity Scenarios, Start Date for Loss, Notional Retirement, Case Management Directions, Costs
Source Language
EN
Medical Negligence Personal Injury Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Forensic Accounting Joint Expert Report Quantification of Future Loss Work Capacity Scenarios +4 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MR RAVI GIDUMAL

1st Plaintiff (acting as Administrator of the Estate of Zubin Mahtani Gidumal)

MR RAVI GIDUMAL

2nd Plaintiff

MS SHALINI MAHTANI

3rd Plaintiff

DR RICHARD WING CHIU

1st Defendant

MATILDA INTERNATIONAL HOSPITAL

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries (medical Negligence) / Case Management Directions for Joint Expert (forensic Accounting) Report; Paper Disposal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether joint instructions to forensic accounting experts should include alternative work capacity scenarios derived from psychiatric reports and witness statements
  2. 2 Whether forensic accounting experts should be asked to quantify loss for partial/alternative work scenarios and to state methodology
  3. 3 Appropriate start date for calculation of P3's loss of earnings (1 June 2009 v 1 January 2012)

Ratio Decidendi

The court directed that the joint instructions must set out all alternative factual scenarios the parties may contend regarding P2 and P3's work capacity; the forensic accounting experts must state whether they can quantify loss under each scenario, provide methodology and reasons or explain inability to do so, identify areas of agreement and disagreement, and address a range of notional retirement ages; the experts must assume two alternative start dates for P3 (1 June 2009 and 1 January 2012) so the court can decide at trial; parties must finalise and dispatch joint instructions within specified short time limits; costs of the application are to be costs in the cause (nisi).

Court Disposition

Application for directions granted in part; parties ordered to finalise joint instructions and experts directed on scope of joint report; costs nisi (costs in the cause).

Orders

  • Parties to compile and agree finalised joint instructions (Draft) within 14 days
  • Within 7 days after finalising, parties to dispatch the joint instructions to the Experts