Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Definition of accident

Legal area

Court

17 Jul 2024

WONG YUN WA, administratrix of the estate of CHAU CHUK KAN v. SURPLUS LINK LTD trading as CHOI FOOK DELIGHT BANQUET AND CHOI FOOK LUXURY BANQUET

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1145
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC2406/2019

The Applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Deceased's spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage was caused or substantially contributed to by workplace temperature changes or the physical exertion of lifting trays; the experts agreed SICH was most likely due to pre-existing hypertension and the medical literature did not provide reasonably convincing support that the alleged workplace factors were triggers; therefore the injury did not arise out of the Deceased's employment and the claim is dismissed.
14 Dec 2023

NOW WIN SOON 對 IMPERIAL PARKING (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

[2023] HKDC 1728
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1111/2021

On the balance of probabilities the applicant's evidence was not credible and unsupported by contemporaneous records or reliable witnesses; the alleged events were either not proved to have occurred or were ordinary workplace interactions that did not meet the statutory definition of an "accident", and the applicant failed to prove causation between the alleged incidents and her psychiatric condition, which was likely pre-existing.
18 Feb 2022

袁永鍵對職業訓練局

Citation

[2022] HKDC 162
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1416/2016

The claimant's account was not credible and was contradicted by contemporaneous CCTV footage, contemporaneous emails, and emergency medical records showing no objective chest injury; the claimant gave inconsistent and retracted statements to police and fabricated elements of his account; meetings and verbal warnings did not amount to a sudden, unusual and unfortunate 'accident' causing injury. Consequently, statutory liability under s5(1) was not established and the claim for employees' compensation fails.
5 Apr 2017

POON CHI YAN v. JSI LOGISTICS (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

POON CHI YAN v. JSI LOGISTICS (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC39/2014

The three collisions are separate accidents; the claims based on the first and second collisions are time-barred under ECO s14(1) and the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse under s14(4) for the inordinate delay; allowing the amendments would cause real prejudice and be unnecessary to the just resolution; accordingly leave to amend to add the first two collisions and leave to adduce the 2nd supplemental witness statement are refused; limited leave to amend the time in the existing claim from 10:30 a.m. to 9:44:26 a.m. is granted; costs ordered against the applicant.
13 Feb 2017

YU PO CHING v. CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

YU PO CHING v. CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1673/2013

On the balance of probabilities the deceased’s death was broadly caused by his ischaemic heart disease together with employment-related factors (increased workload and stress) that contributed to triggering the fatal arrhythmogenic event; the infarction constituted an 'accident' within s.5(1) ECO and respondents are liable to pay statutory compensation agreed at HK$1,239,000.
10 Oct 2001

On Hang Chu v. Chan Ngun

Citation

On Hang Chu v. Chan Ngun
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC646/2000

On the evidence the applicant was an employee of the respondent at the time of the injury; the respondent participated in and derived gain from decoration of flat B so the employment was for the purposes of her trade and s2(1)(b) did not exclude liability; the injury was an accident under the Ordinance and the applicant is entitled to the awarded compensation with interest and costs.
20 Jul 1973

WONG GUN-FOOK AND OTHERS v. MRS. J L G MCLEAN

Citation

WONG GUN-FOOK AND OTHERS v. MRS. J L G MCLEAN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC29/1973

The court held that 'accident' can include a murder, but s.5(6)'s deeming is displaced by evidence to the contrary; on the facts there was evidence fit for a jury to infer the killing was unconnected with employment and the applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the death arose out of and in the course of employment, so the claim must be dismissed.
28 Jun 1973

FAN SEE-YUK AND OTHERS v. OCEAN TRAMPING CO LTD

Citation

FAN SEE-YUK AND OTHERS v. OCEAN TRAMPING CO LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC102/1972

Applicant proved death was prima facie an accident in the course of employment and was entitled to rely on the presumption in s.5(6); the presumption against suicide applied and was not displaced by convincing evidence; consequently respondent liable to pay compensation of $32,695.20 to the widow and six children. The burden of proving suicide rested on respondent and was not satisfied.