SHABBIR AHMED v. CHUN HIN INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

SHABBIR AHMED v. CHUN HIN INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS

Application dismissed because applicant failed to verify the amount of damages as required and failed to provide documentary evidence of financial hardship or explain use of prior interim and further payments, and therefore the court declined to exercise its discretion to order a further interim payment.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
SHABBIR AHMED v. CHUN HIN INTERNATIONAL LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Shabbir Ahmed; 1st Respondent (discontinued): Chun Hin International Limited; 2nd Respondent: Chan Hon Kong and Wong Wai Kei trading as Wang Cheong Construction Company (a firm); 3rd Respondent: Marshall-Karson Construction & Engineers Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 October 2013
Case Number
DCEC1713/2012
Procedural Posture
Employees' Compensation Case / Interim Payment Application (summons Hearing, Decision)
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Payment, Damages Assessment, Financial Hardship, Affidavit Evidence, Costs
Source Language
en
Employees' Compensation Personal Injury Civil Procedure Interim Payment Damages Assessment Financial Hardship Affidavit Evidence Costs

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shabbir Ahmed

Applicant

Chun Hin International Limited

1st Respondent (discontinued)

Chan Hon Kong and Wong Wai Kei trading as Wang Cheong Construction Company (a firm)

2nd Respondent

Marshall-Karson Construction & Engineers Limited

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees' Compensation Case / Interim Payment Application (summons Hearing, Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant complied with Order 29 rule 10(3)(a) by verifying the amount of damages
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated necessity and special hardship to justify an interim payment
  3. 3 Whether previous interim and periodic payments negate the need for further interim relief

Ratio Decidendi

Application dismissed because applicant failed to verify the amount of damages as required and failed to provide documentary evidence of financial hardship or explain use of prior interim and further payments, and therefore the court declined to exercise its discretion to order a further interim payment.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Costs to 2nd and 3rd respondents: HK$3,000, summarily assessed (2 hours allowed)