YU YIN SUN v. 李良 AND OTHERS

YU YIN SUN v. 李良 AND OTHERS

Because the applicant's solicitors had flatly refused to provide the requested particulars in a letter dated 17 November, the court found the summons was properly brought despite technical prematurity and that section 11 did not bar ordering a detailed 12 month account; accordingly the court ordered the applicant to provide the particulars within 21 days.

Citation
YU YIN SUN v. 李良 AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Applicant; 2nd Respondent: Gammon Skanska Limited; 3rd Respondent: 3rd Respondent
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 December 2003
Case Number
DCEC926/2002
Procedural Posture
Employees Compensation / Interlocutory Summons for Further Particulars
Outcome
Summons granted in part
Legal Topics
Workers' Compensation, Particulars of Claim, Discovery, Earnings Assessment
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Personal Injury Civil Procedure Workers' Compensation Particulars of Claim Discovery Earnings Assessment

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Gammon Skanska Limited

2nd Respondent

3rd Respondent

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees Compensation / Interlocutory Summons for Further Particulars

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summons was premature under Rule 18 of the Employees Compensation (Rules of Court) Rules
  2. 2 Whether section 11 establishes a self-contained regime that precludes a request for detailed particulars of earnings
  3. 3 Whether the applicant must provide a twelve month account of employments and earnings and whether that request is unduly onerous

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant's solicitors had flatly refused to provide the requested particulars in a letter dated 17 November, the court found the summons was properly brought despite technical prematurity and that section 11 did not bar ordering a detailed 12 month account; accordingly the court ordered the applicant to provide the particulars within 21 days.

Court Disposition

Summons granted in part

Orders

  • Applicant ordered to provide further and better particulars of earnings and employments for the 12 months immediately prior to the January 2002 accident in terms of paragraphs 1 to 3 of the summons
  • Applicant to provide a short written confirmation that amounts paid into his bank account were unemployment benefit