16 Mar 2010
LAI YING v. LAM LUNG TIN AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- LAI YING v. LAM LUNG TIN AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCPI313/2009
The court refused to admit Dr Rattenbury's report because it was not cogent or helpful: the expert had not inspected the vehicle, relied only on photographs and documents, failed to address key factual indicators (including the taxi leaving the ground and the possibility that impact could disengage a seat belt), and part of the factual issue was rendered unnecessary by the plaintiff's admission; accordingly the summons to admit the report was dismissed.