Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility and disclosure

Legal area

Court

19 Jul 2023

FANG ZHAOHUA 對 KAM FUNG ENGINEERING LTD及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKDC 971
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI1109/2019

Plaintiff's evidence was found wholly unreliable due to deliberate nondisclosure (including imprisonment shortly after the accident) and implausible testimony; defendants had taken reasonable measures appropriate to a construction site and were not negligent; only a minor left knee contusion causally related to the accident requiring simple analgesia; any recoverable damages would be less than the sum already received under workers' compensation; claim dismissed and defendants awarded costs.
16 May 2023

胡對李

Citation

[2023] HKFC 87
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC7853/2017

Court found wife exaggerated parts of her evidence but accepted both parties have earning capacity; husband's inheritance is non‑marital and to be retained by him; marital assets (excluding non‑marital inheritance and illiquid retirement funds until retirement) are to be realised primarily by sale of the former matrimonial home within six months of the absolute divorce; sale proceeds must first discharge mortgage and sale costs then pay HK$3,144,000 as lump sum for the two children and wife’s one‑year rehabilitative needs, then repay each party's certified debts, with any remainder divided eq…
18 Jan 2019

SUMINEM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 161
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL15/2018

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the applicant provided no adequate explanation for the delay and her proposed grounds were vague, lacking particulars and not reasonably arguable; the Director's and Board's findings that the risk was localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and that there was no substantial BOR Article 3 or Article 2 risk were not shown to be legally flawed, so there was no prospect of success to justify extension of time.
27 Jul 2010

CHAN CHUNG KUEN v. MTR CORPORATION LTD

Citation

CHAN CHUNG KUEN v. MTR CORPORATION LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI764/2009

The claimant failed to prove that MTR breached its duty of care: the platform gap was measured at 220 mm and, given the station curvature and official safety assessments, that width was not shown to be unreasonably wide; MTR had adequate precautions (flashing neon lights, visual markings, multilingual announcements and deployed staff), plaintiff's evidence was inconsistent and not credible, and he failed to discharge the burden of proof; accordingly the action is dismissed and MTR is not liable (alternatively the claimant was principally at fault).
15 Feb 2007

LIU CHUN KOW JOE v. LEE SAU WING

Citation

LIU CHUN KOW JOE v. LEE SAU WING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI399/2001

Court found on evidence that the plaintiff had pre-existing degenerative disc disease and a pre-accident psychiatric history; the accident aggravated those conditions but much of the disability was attributable to pre-existing conditions, the plaintiff lacked realistic prospects of promotion regardless of the accident, many career claims were speculative or rejected, and damages were assessed and apportioned accordingly resulting in a total award of HK$594,341.93.
5 Jan 2006

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

Citation

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

District Court
Case number

DCEC310/2003

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.

Hong Kong Case Law

FANG ZHAOHUA 對 KAM FUNG ENGINEERING LTD及另一人

胡 對 李

SUMINEM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

CHAN CHUNG KUEN v. MTR CORPORATION LTD

LIU CHUN KOW JOE v. LEE SAU WING

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

胡對李