MA KIM SING v. URBAN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

MA KIM SING v. URBAN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD AND ANOTHER

Edit the orthopaedic report to remove the non-psychiatric expert's psychiatric comments because the plaintiff relied on a psychiatrist and the parties agreed; allow oral evidence from the orthopaedic experts limited to the specific contested issue of the length of sick leave (given conflicting opinions and Court of Appeal authority), but refuse leave to call them on resumption of pre-accident work because the written reports were sufficiently clear on that point (subject to trial judge's discretion).

Citation
MA KIM SING v. URBAN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Ma Kim Sing; 1st Defendant: Urban Property Management Limited; 2nd Defendant: Wai Hong Cleaning & Pest Control Company Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 June 2008
Case Number
HCPI270/2007
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action / Pre Trial Review (in Chambers)
Outcome
Pre-trial review order granting editing of psychiatric comments from plaintiff's orthopaedic report; granting leave to call orthopaedic experts limited to the issue of length of sick leave; refusing leave to call orthopaedic experts on resumption of pre-accident work (subject to trial judge discretion); reserving 4...
Legal Topics
Editing of Expert Reports, Admissibility of Non Expert Psychiatric Comment, Calling Experts on Specific Issues, Sick Leave Period, Resumption of Pre Accident Work, Trial Management
Source Language
EN

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ma Kim Sing

Plaintiff

Urban Property Management Limited

1st Defendant

Wai Hong Cleaning & Pest Control Company Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action / Pre Trial Review (in Chambers)

  1. 1 Whether non-psychiatric expert's psychiatric observations should be edited out of the report
  2. 2 Whether orthopaedic experts should be permitted to give oral evidence on length of sick leave
  3. 3 Whether orthopaedic experts should be permitted to give oral evidence on ability to resume pre-accident work

Ratio Decidendi

Edit the orthopaedic report to remove the non-psychiatric expert's psychiatric comments because the plaintiff relied on a psychiatrist and the parties agreed; allow oral evidence from the orthopaedic experts limited to the specific contested issue of the length of sick leave (given conflicting opinions and Court of Appeal authority), but refuse leave to call them on resumption of pre-accident work because the written reports were sufficiently clear on that point (subject to trial judge's discretion).

Court Disposition

Pre-trial review order granting editing of psychiatric comments from plaintiff's orthopaedic report; granting leave to call orthopaedic experts limited to the issue of length of sick leave; refusing leave to call orthopaedic experts on resumption of pre-accident work (subject to trial judge discretion); reserving 4...

Orders

  • Delete psychiatric-condition references from Dr Ko's orthopaedic report as agreed by parties
  • Leave granted for Dr Ko and Dr Cheng to be called at trial only on the issue of the length of sick leave