Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appeal against assessment

Legal area

Court

24 Oct 2022

CHEUNG HOI YAN EMILY 對金裝燉奶佬(集團)控股有限公司

Citation

[2022] HKDC 1134
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1912/2019

On the balance of probabilities the court found insufficient and unreliable evidence that any workplace accident occurred on 13 April 2018. The applicant's accounts were internally inconsistent and contradicted contemporaneous medical records and communications; the joint expert evidence and medical records supported the respondent. Accordingly the applicant failed to prove causation and entitlement under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance; respondent's appeals against Form 7 and Form 9 succeed, permanent loss assessed at 0%, temporary incapacity limited to 14 days, and the applicant's sub…
4 Apr 2019

IP PUI FAI 對黃錦陽

Citation

[2019] HKDC 461
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC688/2016

The court accepted claimant's evidence as more credible, applied the multi‑factor employment test and found claimant was a temporary employee of respondent; respondent therefore liable. Court applied s11(2) to fix monthly earnings at HK$31,250, substituted 2% for permanent loss of earning capacity (replacing the committee's 1%), accepted 134 days' incapacity and medical expenses, and awarded total compensation HK$151,104 plus interest and costs (with an exception for the expert's supplemental report). The earlier order directed at Century was rescinded for fairness given procedural doubts.
19 Oct 2011

LEUNG TSZ CHOI v. JOINT UNITED LTD

Citation

LEUNG TSZ CHOI v. JOINT UNITED LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1450/2010

Having accepted Dr Wong's diagnosis and evidence, the court found the appropriate permanent loss of earning capacity to be 3% (increasing the Board's 1% to 3%), adopted $11,550.00 as the applicant's average monthly earnings based on per-container evidence, and awarded compensation calculated as $11,550 x 72 x 3% for s.9, statutory periodic payment calculation net of prior payments for s.10, and allowed medical expenses under s.10A limited by the Third Schedule; total awarded $34,546.00 with interest at half judgment rate and costs to applicant.
19 May 2008

LIMBU PREM PARKASH v. NG YUK MAN formerly t/a SUN FAI TRANSPORTATION CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

LIMBU PREM PARKASH v. NG YUK MAN formerly t/a SUN FAI TRANSPORTATION CO AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC51/2008

Application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide adequate explanation for the delay and failed to present material demonstrating the merits of the intended appeal; under Chung Sau Ling the court requires consideration of delay, reasons, prejudice and merits and overall justice did not favour extension of time.
5 Oct 2006

SIN FU YAU v. WONG PO KEE LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

SIN FU YAU v. WONG PO KEE LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC654/2003

The court held that, absent evidence of fraud, the deeming presumption in section 10(2) of the Employees Compensation Ordinance is irrebuttable; accordingly the certified period of sick leave (4/9/2002 to 6/10/2004) was accepted and extended under section 10(5) where appropriate, and on the evidence the permanent loss of earning capacity was fixed at 2%; applying those findings the net judgment for the Applicant was HK$364,682.40.
3 Mar 2004

CHOW SIN CHUN v. SHENG KUNG HUI DIOCESAN WELFARE COUNCIL

Citation

CHOW SIN CHUN v. SHENG KUNG HUI DIOCESAN WELFARE COUNCIL
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC929/2001

The court dismissed the respondents' appeals, accepting the Special Assessment Board's 21% loss of earning capacity for the July 1999 accident and the Ordinary Assessment Board's 8% for the March 2000 accident, calculated awards accordingly and refused to make an apportionment declaration which must be determined in the common law action.
16 Dec 2002

LAI YUEN HING v. LO CHI HUNG TRADING AS KAM HUNG CONSTRUCTION CO. AND ANOTHER

Citation

LAI YUEN HING v. LO CHI HUNG TRADING AS KAM HUNG CONSTRUCTION CO. AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC14/2000

On the evidence the court preferred the respondents' medical evidence and lay evidence that the applicant returned to substantial work after the accident. The accident caused, at most, minimal residual symptoms; permanent loss of earning capacity assessed at 1%. Sick leave from May 1999 onward was largely not caused by the accident; s.10(2) is a non-rebuttable deeming of incapacity where certified but s.10(1) requires the incapacity to result from the injury. Limited periodical payments allowed (14 days immediately post-accident and two days per month from 17 May 1999 to 14 April 2000). Aggre…
11 Apr 2002

Kwok Yau-tai v. Tung Wah Group of Hospitals

Citation

Kwok Yau-tai v. Tung Wah Group of Hospitals
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC44/2000

The court held that the applicant had demonstrated a reasonable excuse under section 14(4) because the matter was managed via the Labour Department and respondent sick pay for the majority of the limitation period, and the applicant acted promptly to obtain legal aid once payments ceased; accordingly leave was granted to bring a section 18A application. The court also allowed amendment to pursue an out‑of‑time appeal under section 18(2) because early notice of an appeal was given, there was no forensic prejudice, and the appeal could be considered more generously in the context of an existing…
3 Aug 2001

Leung Ming Tim v. Fan Tai Kan t/a Kan Kee Co.

Citation

Leung Ming Tim v. Fan Tai Kan t/a Kan Kee Co.
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC318/2001

The applicant failed to establish a reasonable excuse within section 14(4); evidence showed he was informed of the limitation period and made a deliberate choice to pursue administrative remedies, so leave to bring the out-of-time section 18A application is refused and he is limited to pursuing the in-time appeal under section 18.
29 Oct 1998

LAM KIN MAN v. KOWLOON-CANTON RAILWAY CORPORATION

Citation

LAM KIN MAN v. KOWLOON-CANTON RAILWAY CORPORATION
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC412/1997

An application to appeal an assessment under section 18 can be included in an application for compensation under section 18A; accordingly leave to amend the s.18A application to include the s.18 appeal is granted, service of the amended application is dispensed with, and costs are ordered as directed, because practical consolidation furthers the social purpose of the Ordinance and avoids needless procedural technicalities.