MOHAMMAD LATIF v. WING CHI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD AND OTHERS

MOHAMMAD LATIF v. WING CHI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD AND OTHERS

Applying the principle that a contract of service cannot be transferred without the employee's real consent, and on the balance of probabilities having assessed the totality of documentary and oral evidence (including language barriers, lack of a signed contract with R3, timing of payments and MPF records, and the manner in which post-accident events unfolded), the court found that A did not give express or implied consent to transfer employment to R3 and that R1 remained his employer at the time of the accident; accordingly R2 was ordered to pay R4's costs of the main proceedings and costs of the argument on costs and other specified orders.

Citation
MOHAMMAD LATIF v. WING CHI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CO LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Mohammad Latif; 1st Respondent: Wing Chi Construction Engineering Company Limited; 2nd Respondent: Hyundai Engineering & Construction Company Limited; 3rd Respondent: Hin Sum Manpower Company Limited; 4th Respondent: National Insurance Company Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 August 2003
Case Number
DCEC656/2001
Procedural Posture
Employees' Compensation / Decision on Costs (post Trial)
Outcome
Court concluded R1 was the employer at the time of the accident and made costs and ancillary orders in favour of R4 and the Applicant as detailed below.
Legal Topics
Employer Identification, Transfer of Employment, Costs, Joinder Under Statute, Discontinuance
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Workers' Compensation Insurance Law Civil Procedure Employer Identification Transfer of Employment Costs Joinder Under Statute +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Latif

Applicant

Wing Chi Construction Engineering Company Limited

1st Respondent

Hyundai Engineering & Construction Company Limited

2nd Respondent

Hin Sum Manpower Company Limited

3rd Respondent

National Insurance Company Limited

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees' Compensation / Decision on Costs (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Identity of employer at time of the accident
  2. 2 Whether insurer R4 entitled to recover costs from R2
  3. 3 Whether R4 could be joined/participate in contribution proceedings under s24 Employees' Compensation Ordinance

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the principle that a contract of service cannot be transferred without the employee's real consent, and on the balance of probabilities having assessed the totality of documentary and oral evidence (including language barriers, lack of a signed contract with R3, timing of payments and MPF records, and the manner in which post-accident events unfolded), the court found that A did not give express or implied consent to transfer employment to R3 and that R1 remained his employer at the time of the accident; accordingly R2 was ordered to pay R4's costs of the main proceedings and costs of the argument on costs and other specified orders.

Court Disposition

Court concluded R1 was the employer at the time of the accident and made costs and ancillary orders in favour of R4 and the Applicant as detailed below.

Orders

  • R2 to pay R4's costs of the main proceedings and the costs of the argument on costs to be taxed if not agreed
  • Certificate for counsel granted to the Applicant