Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Hong Kong decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The District Court held all three defendants liable for a construction-site fall, finding breaches of CSSR Reg 38A and 38AA and awarding the plaintiff HK$479,733 plus interest.
The court found the defendants liable after a workplace knee injury was sustained while manually adjusting a precast slab, and rejected contributory negligence.
The court rejected the plaintiff's account as not credible and accepted the defendant's evidence that reasonable steps (fencing, notices, barriers) were taken and the plank and hole were guarded; therefore defendant was not negligent or in breach of statutory duty. Alternatively, if the plaintiff's account were accepted, the plaintiff consciously chose a dangerous unapproved route and was contributorily negligent (apportioned at 30%), and after deducting that reduction and the prior employee compensation award the defendant would owe nothing.
Source excerpt
A district court personal injuries case about a lift incident in Daily House. The court found the incorporated owners liable for poor maintenance but dismissed the plaintiffâs claim after set-off against prior EC compensation.
On the balance of probabilities the external wall had defects which were at least one source of the applicant's internal wall water ingress; the incorporated owners, having been on notice and having had sufficient information and opportunity to investigate and to commission repairs, failed to take appropriate steps and therefore breached their statutory duty under s.18(1)(a) BMO; the applicant proved loss but not the full amount claimed, and a fair award for external and internal repairs and related measures was HKD 83,330.6 plus interest and costs.
Source excerpt
First defendant, as the maintenance contractor, failed to prove it performed adequate periodic inspections or maintenance; the lift was unsafe and a sensor malfunction caused the 2-inch gap, so first defendant breached common law duty and specific statutory duties under Cap.618 (ss12(1),15(2)(b),22(1)); Occupiers Liability Ordinance was inapplicable on facts and defendant was liable to plaintiff for damages, with specified deductions and interest.
Source excerpt
Personal injuries claim by a correctional services officer dismissed after the court found the stairway was dry and the plaintiffâs account unreliable.
High Court personal injuries trial in which the plaintiff alleged a wet, slippery staircase caused his fall at work. The court rejected liability and dismissed the claim.
Personal injuries claim dismissed after the court found the plaintiffâs evidence unreliable and held he had not proved how the ladder fall happened or that any breach caused it.
The District Court held the employer fully liable for a workplace unloading accident, awarded damages for personal injuries, lost earnings and reduced earning capacity, and deducted prior employeesâ compensation.
Explore more
