MOHAMMAD SAFDAR v. CHESCO ENGINEERING LTD

MOHAMMAD SAFDAR v. CHESCO ENGINEERING LTD

The District Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain or adjudicate an employer's claim for indemnity against a third party within employees compensation proceedings under s25(1)(b); the employer must commence separate proceedings to recover indemnity or damages from the third party.

Citation
MOHAMMAD SAFDAR v. CHESCO ENGINEERING LTD
Parties
Applicant: Mohammad Safdar; Respondent: Chesco Engineering Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 October 2008
Case Number
DCEC729/2008
Procedural Posture
Employees Compensation / Decision (reasons Handed Down)
Outcome
Summons withdrawn by leave; Ex-parte Order set aside; Respondent ordered to pay costs to Applicant in respect of the Summons.
Legal Topics
Employer Indemnity Under Employees Compensation Ordinance S25(1)(b), Third Party Proceedings (order 16 Rule 2), Service Out of Jurisdiction (order 11), District Court Jurisdiction, Procedural Requirements for Ex Parte Applications
Source Language
EN
Employment/workers' Compensation Civil Procedure Contract Insurance Law Private International Law Employer Indemnity Under Employees Compensation Ordinance S25(1)(b) Third Party Proceedings (order 16 Rule 2) Service Out of Jurisdiction (order 11) +2 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Safdar

Applicant

Chesco Engineering Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees Compensation / Decision (reasons Handed Down)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Court may make an order indemnifying an employer against a third party within employees compensation proceedings
  2. 2 Whether leave for third party proceedings and service out of jurisdiction was properly sought and supported
  3. 3 Whether the ex-parte order should be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

The District Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain or adjudicate an employer's claim for indemnity against a third party within employees compensation proceedings under s25(1)(b); the employer must commence separate proceedings to recover indemnity or damages from the third party.

Court Disposition

Summons withdrawn by leave; Ex-parte Order set aside; Respondent ordered to pay costs to Applicant in respect of the Summons.

Orders

  • Leave granted to the Respondent to withdraw the Summons
  • Respondent to pay the Applicant costs of the Summons including costs of the hearing to be taxed if not agreed