Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contributory negligence

Legal area

Court

13 May 2026

WU TAOHONG v. BILLION VISION HOLDINGS LTD TRADING UNDER THE STYLE OR FIRM NAME OF HO KONG MAHJONG ENTERTAINMENT CO

Citation

[2026] HKDC 819
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1800/2023

On the balance of probabilities the court found the plaintiff not credible due to delay, material inconsistencies (notably between the Letter Before Action and later evidence), lack of corroboration or eyewitness testimony and implausibility of the alleged mechanism; the harm was not shown to be reasonably foreseeable such that a duty to warn arose; therefore liability under negligence, vicarious liability or occupiers' liability was not established and the claim is dismissed.
8 May 2026

伍金蓮對黃麗容及另一人

Citation

[2026] HKDC 800
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI425/2020

Plaintiff failed to prove the accident occurred in the specific manner pleaded; contemporaneous police, ambulance and medical records and inconsistent witness accounts undermined the plaintiff's version; res ipsa loquitur was inapplicable; on balance of probabilities the claim against both defendants fails and is dismissed.
30 Mar 2026

WU TANGLUN v. CK ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKDC 555
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI4033/2022

Defendants were jointly and severally liable because the half-built platform and system of work were obviously unsafe, the defendants had been criminally convicted for breaches of statutory safety duties which shifted the burden of proof to them, and they failed to adduce evidence to rebut negligence; plaintiff was not contributorily negligent on the facts; damages were quantified accordingly.
13 Feb 2026

廖芷彤對崔思遠

Citation

[2026] HKDC 113
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2789/2021

Defendant is civilly liable for the assault; the defendant's criminal conviction under ESCC 749/2019 is admissible under s62 and establishes the defendant committed the assault; medical expert evidence supporting exaggeration of long‑term symptoms was preferred over experts who relied on treating psychiatrists without explaining objective bases; plaintiff's asserted long‑term post‑concussional syndrome and loss of earning capacity were not proven on the balance of probabilities; damages assessed at HKD 204,140 but wholly offset by prior workers' compensation payments of HKD 694,182.14 so no p…
26 Jan 2026

LIN RUIQING as the Administratrix of the estate of CHEUNG HIN FAI, deceased v. YUNG RUN YEW DANIEL (formerly known as YUNG DING LEUNG DANIEL)

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 614
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI988/2017

On the balance of probabilities the punch was an initiative not a reasonable act of self-defence; volenti, ex turpi and contributory negligence defences fail; defendant liable for battery and negligence; plaintiff proved dependency and other heads of loss; damages assessed at HK$3,778,528 with interest and costs (nisi).
23 Dec 2025

KO TSZ FUNG 對 HIN TAT ENGINEERING LTD及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKDC 2171
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3046/2020

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that any glass fell from the rooftop balustrade or that the first defendant's installation/works caused the accident; contemporaneous documents and witnesses supported defendants' account that first defendant had completed work earlier and was not in control; second defendant had adequate safety systems and the plaintiff voluntarily removed his safety harness and jumped, that act being the sole proximate cause. Accordingly, defendants not liable; if liability were assumed, plaintiff was 50% contributor to his own injury; claim dismisse…
23 Dec 2025

CHAN HUI MAY KIU 對 CHING WING FAT及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6428
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1394/2016

First defendant (Ching) liable for the assault on CHAN HUI MAY KIU and must pay damages; second defendant (Tung Wah) owed visitors a duty of care but the assault was an intentional third‑party act which was not shown to be a reasonably foreseeable or preventable consequence of Tung Wah's management such that causation failed; plaintiff CHAN HEI MAN failed to prove she was assaulted; accordingly claims against Tung Wah dismissed and CHAN HEI MAN's claims dismissed; damages to CHAN HUI MAY KIU assessed at HK$56,380 plus interest and costs as ordered.
23 Dec 2025

CHAN HEI MAN 對 CHING WING FAT及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6428
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1396/2016

The court accepted that the first defendant assaulted the mother (first plaintiff) and is liable in tort; the court rejected the second plaintiff's claim that she was also assaulted on the facts. The court held Tung Wah was not liable: occupiers' liability and negligence did not extend to impose liability for the third party's intentional assault in the factual matrix because Tung Wah did not know or ought reasonably to have foreseen the particular risk or could not have taken realistic measures to prevent the assault; causation therefore failed. Plaintiffs' contractual arguments against Tung…
19 Dec 2025

ZHENG YANQIU 對 NEW WORLD FIRST BUS SERVICES LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6323
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI128/2021

The court accepted the driver's evidence that he observed the plaintiff seated before departing and found the plaintiff's account inconsistent with contemporaneous statements and medical records; res ipsa loquitur was inapplicable; plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's negligence or causation and the claim is dismissed.
27 Nov 2025

CHUI KWOK FAI v. SINO ESTATES MANAGEMENT LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1880
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3911/2021

On the evidence, particularly CCTV and inspection of the plaintiff's shoes, the court was satisfied there was no standing water or condensation at the scene and that the plaintiff slipped due to worn footwear; the defendant did not breach its duty and therefore the plaintiff's claim fails; costs awarded to defendant on a costs order nisi basis.