CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER

CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER

The judge preferred the plaintiff's account and the physical and documentary evidence over the 1st defendant's explanation, finding the defendant had failed to keep proper control of the vehicle (likely having dozed), which caused the collision; accordingly the defendants are liable and damages were assessed and awarded as set out in the judgment.

Citation
CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Chan Fu Man; 1st Defendant: Lam Fook Loi; 2nd Defendant: Wellcome Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 November 2007
Case Number
HCPI962/2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action (court of First Instance) / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants (jointly and severally) for damages.
Legal Topics
Liability of Driver, Employer Vicarious Liability, Assessment of Quantum, Interest on Damages, Taxation of Costs
Source Language
EN
Tort Personal Injury Negligence Vicarious Liability Damages Interest and Costs Liability of Driver Employer Vicarious Liability +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 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Fu Man

Plaintiff

Lam Fook Loi

1st Defendant

Wellcome Company Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action (court of First Instance) / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st defendant was negligent in driving causing the collision
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd defendant is vicariously liable for the 1st defendant's negligence
  3. 3 Appropriate assessment of damages for pain, loss and future loss

Ratio Decidendi

The judge preferred the plaintiff's account and the physical and documentary evidence over the 1st defendant's explanation, finding the defendant had failed to keep proper control of the vehicle (likely having dozed), which caused the collision; accordingly the defendants are liable and damages were assessed and awarded as set out in the judgment.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants (jointly and severally) for damages.

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,624,270.20 HKD.
  • Interest: 2% per annum on damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity from date of service of writ to date of judgment; interest at 5.375% (half judgment rate) on pre-trial loss of earnings, special damages and value of wife's services from date of accident until 27 July 2004, and on the balance outstanding...