Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Assessment of special damages

Legal area

Court

13 Oct 2017

LI CHEUK LAM v. CHEUNG SUN TAI AND OTHERS

Citation

LI CHEUK LAM v. CHEUNG SUN TAI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1102/2015

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the plaintiff suffered a transient soft tissue injury of the right knee on 16 August 2013 but had fully recovered by 4 November 2013; the plaintiff was not credible on continuing symptoms, the single joint expert's opinion was unreliable for failing to address objective records and thus not determinative of ongoing disability, and the IRD records did not support claimed income loss. Accordingly damages were limited to modest PSLA and proven special damages with no award for future loss or loss of earning capacity.
13 Feb 1996

CHINA LIGHT & POWER CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. MICHAEL EDWARD ASHTON FORD

Citation

CHINA LIGHT & POWER CO LTD AND ANOTHER v. MICHAEL EDWARD ASHTON FORD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV108/1995

Majority held that while damages (including potentially exemplary damages) are available for breach of confidence, the appellants were not entitled to an immediate quantified award of exemplary damages tied to contingent US recoveries; the pre-existing award of HK$321,270.13 (special damages) stands as an interim, enforceable award; exemplary damages, if appropriate, should be assessed after the respondent's US proceedings conclude or pursued in fresh proceedings if a recoverable profit is shown.
4 Jul 1985

WONG KAM MAN AND OTHERS v. WONG KAM CHUEN

Citation

WONG KAM MAN AND OTHERS v. WONG KAM CHUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3642/1983

The Court found Defendant negligent due to excessive speed and failure to take effective precautions; Plaintiff was contributorily negligent for not watching traffic while crossing; liability apportioned 80% to Defendant and 20% to Plaintiff; damages assessed accordingly with specified interest periods and rates.
6 Feb 1985

LAW SAI LEUNG v. HO CHAI MAN AND ANOTHER

Citation

LAW SAI LEUNG v. HO CHAI MAN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA8498/1983

Defendants (the driver and the bus company) were negligent and 100% liable for the plaintiff's injuries; the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent on the evidence, and damages are awarded as assessed by the trial judge.
9 Aug 1983

CHEUK WAI CHI AND ANOTHER v. KWONG CHEUK KAI AND OTHERS

Citation

CHEUK WAI CHI AND ANOTHER v. KWONG CHEUK KAI AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA92/1982

Judge found the 2nd defendant drove in the outer lane and steered right instead of left immediately before collision, failing to exercise reasonable care; 3rd defendant crossed double white lines and offered no explanation; liability apportioned equally between 2nd and 3rd defendants; plaintiffs awarded special and general damages as quantified and LARCO and FAO awards calculated by accepted methodology (net income less personal expenses, applied multipliers).
16 Jan 1981

CHOW MAN FAI v. CHENG TO SUM AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHOW MAN FAI v. CHENG TO SUM AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1795/1980

The judge found on the evidence that the plaintiff, an 11 year old, acted negligently by failing to observe the pedestrian light and hastily walking into the path of the defendant's vehicle; the traffic lights were in the 1st defendant's favour, the defendant took reasonable steps to avoid the collision and therefore the accident was wholly caused by the plaintiff; action dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant.
27 Oct 1980

BERTA MARGARETE IRMGARD LAWRENCE v. CHINA MOTOR BUS CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

BERTA MARGARETE IRMGARD LAWRENCE v. CHINA MOTOR BUS CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA885/1980

Both the plaintiff and the driver acted on mistaken assumptions and were each negligent; the driver was negligent in moving the bus in the circumstances and the bus owner is vicariously liable; the plaintiff was contributorily negligent to the extent of 25%, and damages were assessed accordingly.
17 Oct 1979

CAO HAO v. LIONG PENG FONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

CAO HAO v. LIONG PENG FONG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3634/1978

The Court found the accident occurred while plaintiff was alighting and was caused wholly by the first defendant's negligence; plaintiff entitled to recover special damages including reasonable third‑party expenditures for hospital visits and nourishing food despite being paid by a relative and despite some travel involving unlicensed vehicles; plaintiff, given age and disability, was rendered unemployable and entitled to limited award for future earnings; damages and interest awarded as quantified by the Court.