HKSAR v. GAMMON SKANSKA LTD AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v. GAMMON SKANSKA LTD AND ANOTHER

The companies engaged in the works through the joint venture and, under the strict liability regulation, were required to ensure all reasonable measures; the magistrate's findings (use of mechanical excavator within 3 metres of cable, failure to mark cable, inadequate supervision and breach of the Code of Practice) established failure to take reasonable measures, so the convictions and fines were correctly imposed and the appeals must be dismissed.

Citation
HKSAR v. GAMMON SKANSKA LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: Gammon Skanska Limited; 2nd Appellant: Nishimatsu Construction Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 April 2003
Case Number
HCMA38/2003
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) From Magistrate Conviction and Summary Fine
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; convictions and fines upheld.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Compliance With Code of Practice, Liability of Unincorporated Associations/joint Ventures, Appellate Review of Factual Findings, Interpretation of Regulatory Duties
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Regulatory Offences Health and Safety Energy/electricity Regulation Strict Liability Compliance With Code of Practice Liability of Unincorporated Associations/joint Ventures Appellate Review of Factual Findings +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

Gammon Skanska Limited

1st Appellant

Nishimatsu Construction Company Limited

2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) From Magistrate Conviction and Summary Fine

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants ensured all reasonable measures were taken under Reg 10(2)(a)
  2. 2 Whether the companies or the joint venture were the proper persons to prosecute
  3. 3 Whether magistrate erred in factual findings (identification of machine, supervision, marking of cable)

Ratio Decidendi

The companies engaged in the works through the joint venture and, under the strict liability regulation, were required to ensure all reasonable measures; the magistrate's findings (use of mechanical excavator within 3 metres of cable, failure to mark cable, inadequate supervision and breach of the Code of Practice) established failure to take reasonable measures, so the convictions and fines were correctly imposed and the appeals must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; convictions and fines upheld.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Convictions and fines of HKD 10,000 against each appellant affirmed