MOHAMMAD SHAFIQ v. NAIN HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS

MOHAMMAD SHAFIQ v. NAIN HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS

Because the experts differ materially on the significance and causation of the annular tear shown on MRI, and because cross-examination (including interpretation for a non-English speaking plaintiff) is necessary to resolve that disagreement, the court directed that the medical experts be called and listed the case for five days; costs for excessive preparation of issue lists were limited to $1,000 to be allowed on taxation.

Citation
MOHAMMAD SHAFIQ v. NAIN HONG KONG LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohammad Shafiq; 1st Defendant: Nain Hong Kong Limited; 2nd Defendant: VSL DB; 3rd Defendant: Gammon Construction Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 October 2008
Case Number
HCPI764/2007
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action / Pre Trial Review / Decision on Whether to Call Medical Experts and Trial Estimate
Outcome
Doctors to be called; case listed for five days; costs in the cause; limited preparatory costs allowed.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Medical Evidence, Causation, Trial Length Estimation, Costs Taxation
Source Language
EN
Personal Injury Tort Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Medical Evidence Causation Trial Length Estimation Costs Taxation

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

Parties

Mohammad Shafiq

Plaintiff

Nain Hong Kong Limited

1st Defendant

VSL DB

2nd Defendant

Gammon Construction Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action / Pre Trial Review / Decision on Whether to Call Medical Experts and Trial Estimate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the two medical experts should be called to give oral evidence
  2. 2 Whether the judge can resolve differences in expert reports without oral evidence
  3. 3 Estimate of trial length given language interpretation needs

Ratio Decidendi

Because the experts differ materially on the significance and causation of the annular tear shown on MRI, and because cross-examination (including interpretation for a non-English speaking plaintiff) is necessary to resolve that disagreement, the court directed that the medical experts be called and listed the case for five days; costs for excessive preparation of issue lists were limited to $1,000 to be allowed on taxation.

Court Disposition

Doctors to be called; case listed for five days; costs in the cause; limited preparatory costs allowed.

Orders

  • Case to be set down for five days in the Fixture List
  • Medical experts to be called to give oral evidence