LAU MEI WA v. LI KING YIN AND ANOTHER

LAU MEI WA v. LI KING YIN AND ANOTHER

Leave was granted because the plaintiff displayed psychiatric symptoms temporally proximate to the accident, the causation matrix is complex (pre-existing anorexia, organic brain injury and post-accident events) and treating records alone do not resolve diagnosis, causation, prognosis or future treatment costs; preliminary notes from psychiatrists are admissible to justify a forensic joint psychiatric examination, but a solo forensic opinion obtained without leave (the opinion portion of the Kwan 2nd Report) was redacted and not admitted for the interlocutory determination.

Citation
LAU MEI WA v. LI KING YIN AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Lau Mei Wa; 1st Defendant: Li King Yin; 2nd Defendant: Li Wai Chun Management Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 July 2012
Case Number
HCPI527/2011
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action No. 527 of 2011 / Interlocutory/case Management – Application for Leave to Obtain and Adduce Psychiatric Expert Evidence (checklist Review)
Outcome
Leave granted to obtain and adduce psychiatric expert evidence; Kwan 2nd Report opinion redacted for purpose of interlocutory hearing; costs nisi awarded to plaintiff subject to specified limitations
Legal Topics
Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence, Causation, Admissibility of Expert Reports, Costs Consequences, Case Management, Treating Vs Forensic Expert Distinction
Source Language
EN
Personal Injury Medical Evidence Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Psychiatric Injury Negligence Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence Causation +4 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lau Mei Wa

Plaintiff

Li King Yin

1st Defendant

Li Wai Chun Management Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action No. 527 of 2011 / Interlocutory/case Management – Application for Leave to Obtain and Adduce Psychiatric Expert Evidence (checklist Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to obtain and adduce psychiatric expert evidence
  2. 2 Admissibility of three disputed psychiatric reports (Kwan 1st, Chiu, Kwan 2nd)
  3. 3 Whether solo psychiatric opinion obtained without leave is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the plaintiff displayed psychiatric symptoms temporally proximate to the accident, the causation matrix is complex (pre-existing anorexia, organic brain injury and post-accident events) and treating records alone do not resolve diagnosis, causation, prognosis or future treatment costs; preliminary notes from psychiatrists are admissible to justify a forensic joint psychiatric examination, but a solo forensic opinion obtained without leave (the opinion portion of the Kwan 2nd Report) was redacted and not admitted for the interlocutory determination.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to obtain and adduce psychiatric expert evidence; Kwan 2nd Report opinion redacted for purpose of interlocutory hearing; costs nisi awarded to plaintiff subject to specified limitations

Orders

  • Expert evidence limited to one orthopaedics expert, one neurology expert and one psychiatry expert for each party
  • Plaintiff and defendants to state jointly names of their respective psychiatry experts within 21 days and arrange joint psychiatric examination no later than 56 days from decision