CHEN QINGQIANG v. CHAN YAT HONG t/a HOI YAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING

CHEN QINGQIANG v. CHAN YAT HONG t/a HOI YAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING

Although the Third Parties were deemed to have admitted creating an unsafe illegal roof and failing to warn, the court found their defaults were not factually causative of the plaintiff's injuries and that the defendants (employer/contractor) were substantially more blameworthy and causative; accordingly it was not just and equitable to order contribution by the Third Parties.

Citation
CHEN QINGQIANG v. CHAN YAT HONG t/a HOI YAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING
Parties
Plaintiff: CHEN QINGQIANG; 1st Defendant: CHAN YAT HONG trading as HOI YAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING; 2nd Defendant: PRESTIGE CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO., LIMITED; 1st Third Party: CHAN KWOK FAI (陳國輝); 2nd Third Party: CHUI KIT YEE (徐潔儀)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 November 2016
Case Number
HCPI238/2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action With Third Party Contribution Claim / Judgment on Third Party Contribution (hearing 4 Oct 2016; Judgment 9 Nov 2016)
Outcome
No contribution ordered against the 1st and 2nd Third Parties; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Contribution Under Statute, Occupier's Duty of Care, Causation and Apportionment, Failure to Warn, Illegal Structure
Source Language
EN
Tort Occupiers' Liability Workplace Safety Contribution/indemnity Contribution Under Statute Occupier's Duty of Care Causation and Apportionment Failure to Warn +1 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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHEN QINGQIANG

Plaintiff

CHAN YAT HONG trading as HOI YAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING

1st Defendant

PRESTIGE CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING CO., LIMITED

2nd Defendant

CHAN KWOK FAI (陳國輝)

1st Third Party

CHUI KIT YEE (徐潔儀)

2nd Third Party

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action With Third Party Contribution Claim / Judgment on Third Party Contribution (hearing 4 Oct 2016; Judgment 9 Nov 2016)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 1st and 2nd Third Parties liable to contribute under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Ordinance for plaintiff's injuries
  2. 2 Whether occupier's duties under Occupiers Liability Ordinance s3 were breached and causative of damage
  3. 3 Extent to which defendants' non-delegable employer/contractor duties affect apportionment

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Third Parties were deemed to have admitted creating an unsafe illegal roof and failing to warn, the court found their defaults were not factually causative of the plaintiff's injuries and that the defendants (employer/contractor) were substantially more blameworthy and causative; accordingly it was not just and equitable to order contribution by the Third Parties.

Court Disposition

No contribution ordered against the 1st and 2nd Third Parties; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Third Parties not liable to contribute to the plaintiff's damages
  • No order as to costs