CHAN SIK PAN v. WYLAM\'S SERVICE LTD AND OTHERS

CHAN SIK PAN v. WYLAM\'S SERVICE LTD AND OTHERS

Given the special circumstances that the 1st and 2nd defendants generated and held out evidence that misled the plaintiff (and the earlier trial judge) into believing they were the employer, it was reasonable for the plaintiff to sue them; accordingly the court ordered that the 3rd defendant bear the costs of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CHAN SIK PAN v. WYLAM\'S SERVICE LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: CHAN SIK PAN; 1st Defendant: WYLAM S SERVICE LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: LEUNG KWOK CHAU; 3rd Defendant: YU CHI KONG
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 June 2008
Case Number
HCPI648/1995
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action / Ruling on Costs Following Retrial and Appeals
Outcome
Costs order made in favour of plaintiff against 3rd defendant for the whole action; 1st and 2nd defendants to bear their own costs of defence; plaintiff's costs to be taxed under Legal Aid Regulations; certificate for two counsel.
Legal Topics
Employer Identification, Costs Orders, Reasonableness of Joinder, Sanderson Order, Bullock Order, Misleading Evidence
Source Language
en
Personal Injury Employment Law Civil Procedure Costs Insurance Construction/subcontracting Employer Identification Costs Orders Reasonableness of Joinder +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHAN SIK PAN

Plaintiff

WYLAM S SERVICE LIMITED

1st Defendant

LEUNG KWOK CHAU

2nd Defendant

YU CHI KONG

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action / Ruling on Costs Following Retrial and Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who was the legal employer liable for the plaintiff's injury
  2. 2 Allocation of costs after retrial and appeals
  3. 3 Whether it was reasonable to join 1st and 2nd defendants

Ratio Decidendi

Given the special circumstances that the 1st and 2nd defendants generated and held out evidence that misled the plaintiff (and the earlier trial judge) into believing they were the employer, it was reasonable for the plaintiff to sue them; accordingly the court ordered that the 3rd defendant bear the costs of the plaintiff's claims (including those against the 1st and 2nd); the 1st and 2nd defendants were ordered to bear their own costs of defending the action; plaintiff's own costs to be taxed under Legal Aid Regulations; certificate for two counsel awarded.

Court Disposition

Costs order made in favour of plaintiff against 3rd defendant for the whole action; 1st and 2nd defendants to bear their own costs of defence; plaintiff's costs to be taxed under Legal Aid Regulations; certificate for two counsel.

Orders

  • The costs of the plaintiff's claim against the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants to be borne by the 3rd defendant, to be taxed if not agreed
  • The 1st defendant to bear its costs in defending the action