LAW SIU SEE v. DE RODEO HUMAN RESOURCES LTD

LAW SIU SEE v. DE RODEO HUMAN RESOURCES LTD

The court held that the monthly HK$1,700 payment was a reimbursement for vehicle expenses and not 'earnings' under s3 and should be excluded; pro rata double pay is included; on the evidence the Applicant failed to prove alternative-occupation income sufficiently to invoke s9(1A); however medical evidence and the Applicant's reliable testimony justified departing from the Board's 7% to assess permanent loss of earning capacity at 11%; applying monthly earnings of HK$11,917.00 the court calculated statutory awards under s9 and s10 and credited periodical payments, resulting in judgment for HK$145,517.48 in favour of the Applicant.

Citation
LAW SIU SEE v. DE RODEO HUMAN RESOURCES LTD
Parties
Applicant: Law Siu See; Respondent: De Rodeo Human Resources Ltd.
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 April 2003
Case Number
DCEC989/2001
Procedural Posture
Employees' Compensation (employees' Compensation Ordinance Cap.282) / Assessment of Compensation and Appeal Against Review Certificate Under Section 18 (trial on Assessment)
Outcome
Judgment for the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of HK$145,517.48; appeal against Review Certificate allowed insofar as loss of earning capacity assessed at 11% (instead of 7%)
Legal Topics
Loss of Earning Capacity, Calculation of Earnings, Periodical Payments, Section 9(1 A) Discretion, Appeal Against Board Assessment
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Personal Injury Statutory Compensation Loss of Earning Capacity Calculation of Earnings Periodical Payments Section 9(1 A) Discretion Appeal Against Board Assessment

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Law Siu See

Applicant

De Rodeo Human Resources Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees' Compensation (employees' Compensation Ordinance Cap.282) / Assessment of Compensation and Appeal Against Review Certificate Under Section 18 (trial on Assessment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pro rata double pay and a monthly HK$1,700 motorcycle allowance form part of 'earnings' under s3
  2. 2 Proper monthly earnings to be used in s9 and s10 calculations
  3. 3 Appropriate average monthly income for alternative occupations for loss of earning capacity assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the monthly HK$1,700 payment was a reimbursement for vehicle expenses and not 'earnings' under s3 and should be excluded; pro rata double pay is included; on the evidence the Applicant failed to prove alternative-occupation income sufficiently to invoke s9(1A); however medical evidence and the Applicant's reliable testimony justified departing from the Board's 7% to assess permanent loss of earning capacity at 11%; applying monthly earnings of HK$11,917.00 the court calculated statutory awards under s9 and s10 and credited periodical payments, resulting in judgment for HK$145,517.48 in favour of the Applicant.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of HK$145,517.48; appeal against Review Certificate allowed insofar as loss of earning capacity assessed at 11% (instead of 7%)

Orders

  • Judgment for the Applicant for HK$145,517.48
  • Periodical payments received of HK$214,118.64 to be credited against award