YASAR HUSSAIN v. WUI SHING CARGO TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND OTHERS

YASAR HUSSAIN v. WUI SHING CARGO TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND OTHERS

Judge accepted Applicant's account and disbelieved the 4th respondent; on the evidence including witness credibility and documentary inconsistencies the court found the Applicant was employed on site and that the 2nd Respondent, as principal contractor providing hookers, was the Applicant's employer and therefore liable to pay employees' compensation; judgment awarded against the 2nd Respondent for the agreed quantum with interest and costs orders as set out.

Citation
YASAR HUSSAIN v. WUI SHING CARGO TRANSPORTATION CO LTD AND OTHERS
Parties
Applicant: Yasar Hussain; 1st Respondent: Wui Shing Cargo Transportation Company Limited; 2nd Respondent: Seawell Transportation Development (HK) Limited; 3rd Respondent: Leung Yung Shing; 4th Respondent: Kwan Pui Kwan
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 January 2006
Case Number
DCEC310/2003
Procedural Posture
Employees' Compensation / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for the Applicant against the 2nd Respondent
Legal Topics
Employer Identification, Subcontracting, Liability for Workplace Injury, Credibility and Disclosure, Costs Allocation
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Workers' Compensation Insurance Civil Procedure Employer Identification Subcontracting Liability for Workplace Injury Credibility and Disclosure +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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yasar Hussain

Applicant

Wui Shing Cargo Transportation Company Limited

1st Respondent

Seawell Transportation Development (HK) Limited

2nd Respondent

Leung Yung Shing

3rd Respondent

Kwan Pui Kwan

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees' Compensation / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accident arose out of and in the course of the Applicant's employment
  2. 2 Whether any of the Respondents was the Applicant's direct employer and whether the 1st Respondent was a subcontractor of the 2nd Respondent

Ratio Decidendi

Judge accepted Applicant's account and disbelieved the 4th respondent; on the evidence including witness credibility and documentary inconsistencies the court found the Applicant was employed on site and that the 2nd Respondent, as principal contractor providing hookers, was the Applicant's employer and therefore liable to pay employees' compensation; judgment awarded against the 2nd Respondent for the agreed quantum with interest and costs orders as set out.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Applicant against the 2nd Respondent

Orders

  • Judgment for the Applicant against the 2nd Respondent in the sum of HKD 45,504.00 inclusive of agreed quantum and interest calculated up to 25 September 2005
  • Interest from 25 September 2005 at half judgment rate until date of judgment and thereafter at judgment rate until payment