YEUNG MAN v. WING SHING CAISSON & FOUNDATION LTD AND ANOTHER

YEUNG MAN v. WING SHING CAISSON & FOUNDATION LTD AND ANOTHER

The court exercised case management powers to exclude the applicant's additional orthopaedic expert because the proposed report added no material probative value beyond existing joint-examined expert evidence, was disclosed late creating unfair tactical advantage and prejudice, and the applicant failed to serve an ordered supplemental report; accordingly the application to adduce the second expert was dismissed and the prior order for a supplemental report was rescinded.

Citation
YEUNG MAN v. WING SHING CAISSON & FOUNDATION LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
Applicant: Yeung Man; 1st Respondent: Wing Shing Caisson & Foundation Limited; 2nd Respondent: China Overseas Building Construction Limited
Court
District Court
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 September 2005
Case Number
DCEC851/2004
Procedural Posture
Employees Compensation / Case Management (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application to adduce report of Dr Christopher Tong and to permit two orthopaedic experts dismissed; prior order requiring supplemental report rescinded; costs allocated.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Case Management, Costs, Disclosure, Permission to Adduce Evidence
Source Language
EN
Employees Compensation Personal Injury Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Case Management Costs Disclosure Permission to Adduce Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yeung Man

Applicant

Wing Shing Caisson & Foundation Limited

1st Respondent

China Overseas Building Construction Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employees Compensation / Case Management (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of additional expert medical evidence
  2. 2 Disclosure of supplemental expert report
  3. 3 Limitation on number of experts for trial

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised case management powers to exclude the applicant's additional orthopaedic expert because the proposed report added no material probative value beyond existing joint-examined expert evidence, was disclosed late creating unfair tactical advantage and prejudice, and the applicant failed to serve an ordered supplemental report; accordingly the application to adduce the second expert was dismissed and the prior order for a supplemental report was rescinded.

Court Disposition

Application to adduce report of Dr Christopher Tong and to permit two orthopaedic experts dismissed; prior order requiring supplemental report rescinded; costs allocated.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the applicant's summons dismissed (application to adduce Dr Christopher Tong's report and to allow two orthopaedic experts dismissed)
  • Costs in relation to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the applicant's summons to be costs in the cause of the application; three minutes of today's hearing time apportioned for this aspect