蔣偉明 v. 左潔冰及另一人

蔣偉明 v. 左潔冰及另一人

The court was not satisfied that the plaintiff proved bias or apparent bias by the joint expert and found the expert's report was completed before the later order; accordingly the application to set aside the single joint expert order and the striking out application failed, the Master B Mak order was affirmed, but the plaintiff was granted leave to cross-examine the single joint expert at trial; costs awarded to defendants with a certificate for counsel.

Citation
蔣偉明 v. 左潔冰及另一人
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: 1st Defendant; Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 March 2011
Case Number
DCCJ4679/2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Master’s Decision in District Court Proceedings / Judgment on Appeal/hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; order of Master B Mak dated 4 August 2010 affirmed
Legal Topics
Single Joint Expert, Expert Evidence, Apparent Bias, Strike Out for Abuse of Process, Cross Examination of Expert, Costs
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Evidence Construction/contract Single Joint Expert Expert Evidence Apparent Bias Strike Out for Abuse of Process Cross Examination of Expert +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff

Plaintiff

1st Defendant

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Master’s Decision in District Court Proceedings / Judgment on Appeal/hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the single joint expert order made under Order 38, r 4A(1) should be set aside under r 4A(7)
  2. 2 Whether allegations of bias or apparent bias against the single joint expert are made out
  3. 3 Whether paragraphs 33 and 34 of the Defence and Counterclaim should be struck out as an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The court was not satisfied that the plaintiff proved bias or apparent bias by the joint expert and found the expert's report was completed before the later order; accordingly the application to set aside the single joint expert order and the striking out application failed, the Master B Mak order was affirmed, but the plaintiff was granted leave to cross-examine the single joint expert at trial; costs awarded to defendants with a certificate for counsel.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; order of Master B Mak dated 4 August 2010 affirmed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's appeal dated 18 August 2010 dismissed and Master B Mak's order affirmed
  • Leave granted to the plaintiff to cross-examine the single joint expert witness at trial