Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Criminal conviction as evidence

Legal area

Court

5 Aug 1986

BALASING GURUNG v. NG LAY

Citation

BALASING GURUNG v. NG LAY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4587/1985

Defendant was liable for the collision due to admitted failure to keep proper look-out and inability to see Plaintiff in time; Plaintiff was 15% contributor to damage (apportioned for lack of rear lamp and limited fault in assessing speed/visibility). Damages were assessed on the balance of probabilities with allowances for contingencies and currency treatment as set out in judgment.
24 Feb 1981

YAU FUNG LIN v. CHAN YAT SUN AND OTHERS

Citation

YAU FUNG LIN v. CHAN YAT SUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1536/1980

On the evidence the car driver (2nd defendant) was primarily negligent and caused the accident through excessive speed and loss of control (80%); the bus driver (4th defendant) bore secondary responsibility for being insufficiently close to his side of the road (20%); the bus driver's magistrates' conviction was not overturned and was given weight; judgment entered for plaintiff for $173,800 with apportionment 80% to 1st/2nd defendants and 20% to 3rd/4th defendants.
17 Jan 1980

LI TAT MAN v. CHAN TONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

LI TAT MAN v. CHAN TONG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA594/1979

The magistrates' conviction of careless driving triggered the evidential presumption under s62(2) Evidence Ordinance; the 2nd defendant failed to rebut that presumption given his inconsistent statements and admissions, the court found the 2nd defendant negligent; the plaintiff was contributorily negligent (25%) for following too closely; damages were assessed accordingly with specified general and special damages and interest.
3 Jul 1972

CHOW HING CHUEN v. CHU KWAN KWONG

Citation

CHOW HING CHUEN v. CHU KWAN KWONG
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ1909/1972

Defendant committed a deliberate and premeditated assault; exemplary damages were inappropriate under binding authority restricting punitive awards, but aggravated damages could be awarded for the outrageous conduct and injury to feelings; service of notice was properly effected under Rule 38E(a) allowing the hearing in defendant's absence; award of aggravated damages of $2,000 with costs was justified.

Hong Kong Case Law

BALASING GURUNG v. NG LAY

YAU FUNG LIN v. CHAN YAT SUN AND OTHERS

LI TAT MAN v. CHAN TONG AND ANOTHER

CHOW HING CHUEN v. CHU KWAN KWONG