DAI CHUNCHENG v. PAT TAT TRANSPORTATION LTD

DAI CHUNCHENG v. PAT TAT TRANSPORTATION LTD

Applicant was the respondent's employee on the accident date; the accident arose out of and in the course of that employment; applicant's monthly earnings before the accident were proved on balance of probabilities to be HK$13,000 using s.11(1)(b) methodology and supporting contemporaneous record; unverified witness statements of absent respondent were excluded as prejudicial under s.47 Evidence Ordinance; compensation awarded accordingly.

Citation
DAI CHUNCHENG v. PAT TAT TRANSPORTATION LTD
Parties
Applicant: Dai Chuncheng
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 January 2017
Case Number
DCEC2117/2014
Procedural Posture
Employees Compensation / Trial Judgment (district Court)
Outcome
Judgment entered against respondent in favour of applicant
Legal Topics
Employees' Compensation, Employment Status, Causation, Quantum of Damages, Admissibility of Hearsay, Representation During Winding Up
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Personal Injury Civil Procedure Evidence Employees' Compensation Employment Status Causation Quantum of Damages +2 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dai Chuncheng

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Employees Compensation / Trial Judgment (district Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was the respondent's employee on the date of the accident
  2. 2 Whether the accident arose out of and in the course of employment
  3. 3 Proper method and amount for calculating monthly earnings for ss.9 and 10 compensation

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant was the respondent's employee on the accident date; the accident arose out of and in the course of that employment; applicant's monthly earnings before the accident were proved on balance of probabilities to be HK$13,000 using s.11(1)(b) methodology and supporting contemporaneous record; unverified witness statements of absent respondent were excluded as prejudicial under s.47 Evidence Ordinance; compensation awarded accordingly.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered against respondent in favour of applicant

Orders

  • Judgment for applicant for compensation under the Ordinance: HKD 18,720 under s.9
  • Judgment for applicant for compensation under the Ordinance: HKD 81,035 under s.10