TSAO CHING v. LAU YU KWAN AND ANOTHER

TSAO CHING v. LAU YU KWAN AND ANOTHER

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the tram driver acted reasonably (reduced speed to ~16-17 km/h, sounded horn, applied brakes when the plaintiff suddenly dashed out) and the plaintiff unexpectedly dashed from the safety island against the pedestrian signal; therefore the driver was not negligent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TSAO CHING v. LAU YU KWAN AND ANOTHER
Parties
Plaintiff: TSAO CHING; 1st Defendant: LAU YU KWAN; 2nd Defendant: HONG KONG TRAMWAYS LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 December 2006
Case Number
HCPI324/2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury (tram Accident) / Judgment on Liability (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Standard of Care, Contributory Negligence, Sudden Emergency, Employer Liability
Source Language
en
Personal Injury Negligence Vicarious Liability Road/traffic Safety Duty of Care Standard of Care Contributory Negligence Sudden Emergency +1 more

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSAO CHING

Plaintiff

LAU YU KWAN

1st Defendant

HONG KONG TRAMWAYS LIMITED

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury (tram Accident) / Judgment on Liability (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st defendant tram driver was negligent
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd defendant employer is vicariously liable for the driver
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the tram driver acted reasonably (reduced speed to ~16-17 km/h, sounded horn, applied brakes when the plaintiff suddenly dashed out) and the plaintiff unexpectedly dashed from the safety island against the pedestrian signal; therefore the driver was not negligent and the plaintiff alone caused the accident, absolving both the driver and employer from liability.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the defendants