LAU WING YEUNG v. KOWLOON CRICKET CLUB
The court held that documents in DCPI 2491/2012 and bank transaction records that bear on the plaintiff's earnings, sick leave and funds received are relevant to causation and apportionment of loss of earnings and thus specific discovery is ordered as amended; discovery of the wife's general employment records is refused but her bank transaction records that show transfers to the plaintiff are ordered; no supplemental expert report was required; the plaintiff may serve a supplemental witness statement but the application to file a re-revised statement of damages is dismissed as premature; costs allocated as ordered.
- Citation
- LAU WING YEUNG v. KOWLOON CRICKET CLUB
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendant; Spouse/non Party Subject to Summons: Chan Wai Hing
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 16 April 2014
- Case Number
- HCPI955/2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Personal Injury (interlocutory Discovery) / Interlocutory (chambers Applications for Specific Discovery and Amendment)
- Outcome
- First Summons granted in part as amended, Second Summons granted in part, Third Summons granted in part (supplemental witness statement allowed) and plaintiff's application to file a re-revised Statement of Damages dismissed as premature; costs allocated as ordered.
- Legal Topics
- Specific Discovery, Discovery Against Non Party (order 24 Rule 7 A), Relevance Test for Discovery, Apportionment of Damages, Causation, Expert Evidence, Amendment of Statement of Damages
- Source Language
- EN
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Plaintiff
Plaintiff
Defendant
Defendant
Chan Wai Hing
Spouse/non Party Subject to Summons
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury (interlocutory Discovery) / Interlocutory (chambers Applications for Specific Discovery and Amendment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether documents in separate personal injury action DCPI 2491/2012 are relevant for discovery in current action
- 2 Whether specific discovery should be ordered against the plaintiff's wife (non-party)
- 3 Whether bank records and earnings documents are within plaintiff's possession custody or power and therefore discoverable
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that documents in DCPI 2491/2012 and bank transaction records that bear on the plaintiff's earnings, sick leave and funds received are relevant to causation and apportionment of loss of earnings and thus specific discovery is ordered as amended; discovery of the wife's general employment records is refused but her bank transaction records that show transfers to the plaintiff are ordered; no supplemental expert report was required; the plaintiff may serve a supplemental witness statement but the application to file a re-revised statement of damages is dismissed as premature; costs allocated as ordered.
Court Disposition
First Summons granted in part as amended, Second Summons granted in part, Third Summons granted in part (supplemental witness statement allowed) and plaintiff's application to file a re-revised Statement of Damages dismissed as premature; costs allocated as ordered.
Orders
- First Summons: specific discovery in amended terms limited to: (i) Statement of Claim and Revised Statement of Claim (if any) filed in DCPI 2491/2012; (ii) medical reports and documents concerning the Plaintiff's earnings filed in DCPI 2491/2012 pursuant to PD18.1; (iii) medical expert reports in DCPI 2491/2012;...
- Second Summons: order in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 and the Schedule save as to delete paragraph (a) seeking the wife's employment records and earnings; allow discovery of the wife's bank transaction records showing transfers to the plaintiff.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment