LAU SUK HAN LORETTA v. LI FUNG MING KRIZIA

bjbj HCPI 859/2016 [2024] HKCFI 188 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE PERSONAL INJURIES ACTION NO 859 OF 2016 BETWEEN LAU SUK HAN LORETTA Plaintiff and LI FUNG MING KRIZIA 1st Defendant GALE, JOHN STIRLING 2nd Defendant (Discontinued) Before: Deputy High Court Judge Leung in Chambers Date of Hearing: 14 September 2023 Date of Decision on Costs: 15 January 2024 Decision on costs The 1st t: Between 2003 and 2012, she had been a partner in various law firms including Simmons & Simmons, Mayer Brown LLP and Goodwin Procter LLP ( ). In 2012, the plaintiff became the managing partner of the Hong Kong office of Watson Farley & Williams ( ). The accident happened in August 2013. Except for working as advisor/consultant for a friend in late December 2013, the plaintiff was on sick leave. After the maximum sick leave period allowed under her partnership deed with WFW, she resigned from WFW on director at Milestone Builder Holdings Limited ( MBHL ). On the above basis, the plaintiff claims for loss of earnings as a result of inability to continue her pre-accident job or to secure income commensurate with her pre-accident job. On top of that, as mentioned, she claims for loss of earning capacity. The plaintiff has since 2021 made discovery of documents including those said to be relating to her pre-accident and post-accident earnings. Pursuant to orders of the court, filing of answer by the 1st court as well as the court documents from the court file for a full history of the matter. The principles O26, r1(1) provides that interrogatories must relate to the matter in question between the parties in the cause or matter which are necessary either for disposing fairly of the cause or matter or for saving costs. Fishing or oppressive interrogatories should not be allowed. The court is expected to exercise its discretion in the determination, taking in account all the circumstances of the case: see f ought has or had in his possession, custody or power the document or class of document, and that it relates to any matter in question in the cause or matter in the case. The parties have no quarrel about the test of relevance for this purpose. Discussion The relevance and necessity of the 1st aintiff has disclosed information and documents said to be relating to her earnings prior to and after the accident. In September 2021, the court has also ordered specific discovery of certain documents. Amongst others, there were the follows: Bank account history of Bank of China ( ) account no with the order for specific discovery mentioned above. They covered documents concerning the employment dispute between the plaintiff and WFW as well as the tax documents and records for the period when she worked for GP. The 1st defendant has also requested for further information and documents relating to the financial affairs of the plaintiff discernible from the documents disclosed. According to his letter dated 12 or power; and both parties shall take out their respective applications in respect of all outstanding interlocutory matters, which, if indeed taken out, should be listed to be heard at the same time at the next checklist review hearing before this court. Two points should be noted. First, according to the explanation in her written direction, Marlene here was guaranteed minimum income payable by GP to the plaintiff for the financial year from October 2011 to September 2012, and if there was a drop from the previous financial year and why; the amount of tax which the plaintiff had to pay when working for GP from January 2010 to January 2012; the bank transactions relating to tax payments made ility in relation to her income received; and whether the plaintiff had to report and/or pay tax for her income received from GP and, if yes, the amount and their identification from the transactions in the disclosed documents; Regarding the plaintiff s lo etween the plaintiff and WFW: confirm whether WFW had made a reserve on behalf of the plaintiff of an estimated sum for enabling the plaintiff to discharge her liability for taxation; if yes: confirm whether WFW paid tax from the plaintiff s tax reserve account from the firm to tion lists/bank account statements; confirm whether the plaintiff made any additional contribution to the reserve as to ensure that the amount in the tax reserve account would be sufficient to discharge the plaintiff s tax liability; confirm: whether the plaintiff s income received from WFW as stated in 32 of her witness statement were net of her tax liability in relation to her income received from WFW; whether the plaintiff had to report and/or pay tax for her income received from WFW; and if yes, the amo purposes and nature of the transactions; Identify the payees and provide reasons, purposes and nature of the transactions; Confirm whether the plaintiff has any other bank account(s) that have not been disclosed and, if yes, provide the bank name, account type and account number of such account(s). On the same day, the 1st respect of the tax documents concerning her work for GP and the documents in the relevant employment tribunal concerning the dispute between the plaintiff and WFW. It also targeted the documents in relation to her settlement of legal fees for such employment dispute. On 20 the following further information: explain the failure of the bank documents disclosed by the plaintiff to show the deposit entries recording the earnings received from MBHL from June 2017 to October 2020; and disclose any other bank account which should evidence such receipts; explain the failure of the bank documents disclosed by the plaintiff to show the deposit entries recording the earnings received from PSCL from June 2015 to March 2022 (except for that for April to June 2020); and disclose any other bank account which should evidence such receipts; confirm whether the plaintiff has/had other sources of income in addition to the various parties pleaded in the re-revised statement of damages; and, if yes, disclose information and relevant documents; explain the various deposit entries in Account eposit transactions recorded in Account 3 from Bupa (Asia) Ltd ( Bupa ) from August 2021 to April 2022, including whether they related to another accident happened to the plaintiff and, if yes, provide particulars. The above request met with the plaintiff s objection, to which the 1st {p{e{e{pZOC h5$` h5$` h sl h sl gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 |qf[TLE>L h~~} h5$` h sl h5$` gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 h&)0 h,S. gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 gd// gd 2 hX q h31L gdgZ gdgZ gdyqq gdyqq h1B[ h&fE gdM5Y gd 2 gd 2 hjv* hgs` hjv* hgs` &`#$ gdGO gd 2 gd 2 gd 2 hOA, hOA, hOA, h8^8 h8^8 gdOA, &`#$ h8^8 gd 2 h8^8 & #$ & #$ & #$ & #$ [Content_Types].xml _rels/.rels theme/theme/themeManager.xml K Y, sQ}# theme/theme/theme1.xml $O}) Xp90 +PHI| PP yu 9xu5 fs+W VF7H q=. 8}d- qyI@ j!Q_ jyV` |PZ+ T ""p < 4V O&x$ A8>v ;EUC n 8r *~P(5 .}x E /,EE\} theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels 5 6?$Q K(M&$R(.1 [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK theme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?> <a:clrMap xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" bg1="lt1" tx1="dk1" bg2="lt2" tx2="dk2" accent1="accent1" accent2="accent2" accent3="accent3" accent4="accent4" accent5="accent5" accent6="accent6" hlink="hlink" folHlink="folHlink"/> [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml *0Sr <4a& qfEO-zQc` #H5| uFXIP% drs/downrev.xmlL @dg b6NA [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml WPn \k GQDu L@cC} Rt_, drs/downrev.xmlL !kZO K(dFC [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml lCpe 6k(w N'.< V}>|%a (v.W "^*I,}B drs/downrev.xmlL z+vB ?Ro&^ }%mo QIrk [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml 9/L)Z0* %=C %PUZ 5u9V ZdGAC _4fQ drs/downrev.xmlL @dg b6NA [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml :m9X#u N'., _fgOG 5v"^JI< drs/downrev.xmlL !kZO K(dFC [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK [Content_Types].xml dlyLho ;d]6 yJ.; _rels/.rels fLV:* ]m@= T;GI b9`5 drs/e2oDoc.xml $mXh ^%#`m iylC *r!q @#zV 'Ky~"? p>t# SJ(f o~sP [%w?v drs/downrev.xmlL z+vB ?Ro&^ }%mo QIrk [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK drs/e2oDoc.xmlPK drs/downrev.xmlPK bf"\ FD`Ax 8A O* x| 8a 8A O FD`A N#"{4 14{> High Court Normal.dotm Windows User Microsoft Office Word Judiciary Title <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?><b:Sources SelectedStyle="\APA.XSL" StyleName="APA" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"></b:Sources> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> <ds:datastoreItem ds:itemID="{A0731CEB-1658-4FFF-A8DA-AB951A6DDE38}" xmlns:ds="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/customXml"><ds:schemaRefs><ds:schemaRef ds:uri="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"/></ds:schemaRefs></ds:datastoreItem> Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8