LING MAN KUEN v. CHOW CHAN MING AND ANOTHER

LING MAN KUEN v. CHOW CHAN MING AND ANOTHER

Findings: the 1st Defendant initiated the assault; the Plaintiff's injuries resulted from that assault (not a later fall); the assault occurred in the course of duties and was closely connected to the 1st Defendant's employment such that it is fair and just to hold the 2nd Defendant vicariously liable; the 2nd Defendant was not negligent nor in breach of contract on pleaded particulars; damages assessed net of employee's compensation and counterclaim dismissed.

Citation
LING MAN KUEN v. CHOW CHAN MING AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff (Mr. Ling); 1st Defendant: 1st Defendant (Mr. Tang Chi Kin?); 2nd Defendant: 2nd Defendant (Ltd company)
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 August 2006
Case Number
DCPI1445/2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Assault With Employment Law Elements (vicarious Liability, Negligence, Breach of Contract) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st and 2nd Defendants for damages net of employee's compensation; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Assault, Self Defence, Close Connection Test, Employer Vicarious Liability, Causation, Quantum of Damages, Employer Duty to Protect Employees
Source Language
EN
Tort Employment Law Personal Injury Vicarious Liability Negligence Contract Law Assault Self Defence +5 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff (Mr. Ling)

Plaintiff

1st Defendant (Mr. Tang Chi Kin?)

1st Defendant

2nd Defendant (Ltd company)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Assault With Employment Law Elements (vicarious Liability, Negligence, Breach of Contract) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the 1st Defendant strike the first blow?
  2. 2 If self-defence, was force excessive or did Plaintiff assault 1st Defendant?
  3. 3 Did the Plaintiff's injuries arise from the alleged assault or from a subsequent fall?

Ratio Decidendi

Findings: the 1st Defendant initiated the assault; the Plaintiff's injuries resulted from that assault (not a later fall); the assault occurred in the course of duties and was closely connected to the 1st Defendant's employment such that it is fair and just to hold the 2nd Defendant vicariously liable; the 2nd Defendant was not negligent nor in breach of contract on pleaded particulars; damages assessed net of employee's compensation and counterclaim dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st and 2nd Defendants for damages net of employee's compensation; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants in the sum of HK$54,838.65
  • Interest at judgment rate from date of Writ to date of judgment and thereafter until payment