LEE SAU FAT v. F. H. SECURITY SERVICES CO LTD

LEE SAU FAT v. F. H. SECURITY SERVICES CO LTD

Where related EC and PI proceedings concern the same injuries and parties, counsel must disclose the existence and status of related proceedings and any expert reports; absent cogent justification the court will order joint expert examinations/reports and may penalise party‑driven piecemeal solo reporting by allocating costs so that each side bears its own costs of already‑obtained solo reports and by allowing legal aid taxation where appropriate; consolidation and a detailed timetable for joint supplemental orthopaedic and psychiatric reports was required here.

Citation
LEE SAU FAT v. F. H. SECURITY SERVICES CO LTD
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: Lee Sau Fat; Respondent/defendant: F. H. Security Services Company Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 July 2009
Case Number
DCPI1471/2008
Procedural Posture
Employees' Compensation and Personal Injuries Actions (related/consolidated) / Directions Hearings / Pre‑trial Case Management and Rulings on Costs
Outcome
Consolidation of the two EC actions and comprehensive case management directions across all three actions; orders for joint supplemental orthopaedic and psychiatric reports, detailed disclosure and timetable; costs consequences imposed for solo reports and costs reserved with provision for legal aid taxation.
Legal Topics
Employees Compensation Assessment (mab), Joint Vs Solo Expert Reports, Case Management (pd18.1/pd18.2), Disclosure of Related Proceedings, Consolidation, Sanctions for Non‑disclosure
Source Language
EN
Employees Compensation Personal Injury Civil Procedure Evidence (expert Evidence) Costs Employees Compensation Assessment (mab) Joint Vs Solo Expert Reports Case Management (pd18.1/pd18.2) +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Sau Fat

Applicant/plaintiff

F. H. Security Services Company Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Employees' Compensation and Personal Injuries Actions (related/consolidated) / Directions Hearings / Pre‑trial Case Management and Rulings on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parties must disclose existence and results of related proceedings and expert reports to enable court case management
  2. 2 Whether solo expert examinations/reports obtained without court directions are justified and admissible
  3. 3 Whether a notional Chinese wall between related EC and PI proceedings excuses non‑disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

Where related EC and PI proceedings concern the same injuries and parties, counsel must disclose the existence and status of related proceedings and any expert reports; absent cogent justification the court will order joint expert examinations/reports and may penalise party‑driven piecemeal solo reporting by allocating costs so that each side bears its own costs of already‑obtained solo reports and by allowing legal aid taxation where appropriate; consolidation and a detailed timetable for joint supplemental orthopaedic and psychiatric reports was required here.

Court Disposition

Consolidation of the two EC actions and comprehensive case management directions across all three actions; orders for joint supplemental orthopaedic and psychiatric reports, detailed disclosure and timetable; costs consequences imposed for solo reports and costs reserved with provision for legal aid taxation.

Orders

  • Consolidate 1st and 2nd EC Actions; 1st EC Action to be lead and consolidated pleadings to be filed within 7 days
  • File/exchange witness statements for consolidated EC action on or before 31 July 2009