CHAN LAI YING v. A S WATSON & CO LTD

CHAN LAI YING v. A S WATSON & CO LTD

The court exercised its case management discretion: it refused to allow recovery of the costs of Dr Lai's supplemental psychiatric report dated 29 January 2009, reserved admissibility and recoverability of other solo expert reports, and ordered the parties to jointly apply and propose directions (including for expert evidence) within specified deadlines; the court held that parties must adopt a joint expert approach unless leave is sought and justified, and that withholding information about solo reports between corresponding proceedings is unacceptable.

Citation
CHAN LAI YING v. A S WATSON & CO LTD
Parties
Applicant / Plaintiff: Chan Lai Ying; Respondent / Defendant: A S Watson & Company Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Case Number
DCEC1767/2006
Procedural Posture
Employees Compensation (with Corresponding Common Law Personal Injuries Action) / Directions Hearing / Case Management (post Claim, Pre Trial)
Outcome
Directions granted; issues of admissibility of solo reports and most costs reserved; Applicant not entitled to costs of Dr Lai's supplemental report dated 29 January 2009; parties ordered to file a Joint Written Application with specified information and proposals; matter adjourned sine die with liberty to restore;...
Legal Topics
Employees Compensation, Expert Medical Evidence, Joint Expert Reports, Legal Professional Privilege, Costs and Taxation, Case Management, Disclosure Between Corresponding Proceedings
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Personal Injury Civil Procedure Evidence Employees Compensation Expert Medical Evidence Joint Expert Reports Legal Professional Privilege +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 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chan Lai Ying

Applicant / Plaintiff

A S Watson & Company Limited

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Employees Compensation (with Corresponding Common Law Personal Injuries Action) / Directions Hearing / Case Management (post Claim, Pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether solo expert medical reports obtained without prior leave can be adduced in the EC Action
  2. 2 Whether parties must adopt a joint expert approach under Practice Direction 18.1/18.2 and seek leave for any solo approach
  3. 3 Whether costs of supplemental solo expert reports should be allowed or taxed against the Applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its case management discretion: it refused to allow recovery of the costs of Dr Lai's supplemental psychiatric report dated 29 January 2009, reserved admissibility and recoverability of other solo expert reports, and ordered the parties to jointly apply and propose directions (including for expert evidence) within specified deadlines; the court held that parties must adopt a joint expert approach unless leave is sought and justified, and that withholding information about solo reports between corresponding proceedings is unacceptable.

Court Disposition

Directions granted; issues of admissibility of solo reports and most costs reserved; Applicant not entitled to costs of Dr Lai's supplemental report dated 29 January 2009; parties ordered to file a Joint Written Application with specified information and proposals; matter adjourned sine die with liberty to restore;...

Orders

  • Applicant shall not be entitled to the costs of Dr Lai's preparation and finalisation of his supplemental expert report dated 29 January 2009 in any event
  • Issues of whether the solo expert reports of Dr Ho, Dr Lam, Dr Lai and Prof Lieh Mak can be adduced and/or used in the EC Action and whether any further/joint supplemental reports or other expert reports are necessary are reserved