Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Liability

Legal area

Court

26 Sept 2025

AHMAD IDREES 對 CHAN WAI YUE及另一人

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1607
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI4167/2020

The court preferred the plaintiff's consistent contemporaneous accounts supported by the police notebook and ambulance record over defendant's contradictory later accounts; therefore D1 was negligent for encroaching into the plaintiff's lane and causing the collision; the plaintiff bore no contributory negligence; special damages must be proved by evidence and unsupported claims are disallowed; damages awarded accordingly.
26 Aug 2025

CHAN CHEUK WING v. INFINITIER COMPANY LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3575
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI21/2020

On the balance of probabilities plaintiff failed to prove that the floor condition caused his fall; the proved unevenness was only a couple of millimetres and would not reasonably cause loss of balance for a person wearing ordinary sneakers; plaintiff's evidence was inconsistent and evolved after the event; there was no evidence of complaints or prior accidents to make the risk reasonably foreseeable and remediation would have been disproportionate; therefore defendant did not breach its duty and claim is dismissed.
15 Jul 2025

NG TIN YEUNG v. LO SHUK FA trading as LOYAL DECORATION CO.

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1094
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2356/2017

The court accepted the plaintiff's unchallenged evidence that he was assigned to work and instructed to use the defendant's tile cutter and that inadequate equipment was provided; the defendant adduced no evidence and therefore failed to discharge the burden to establish contributory negligence; liability in negligence was established and damages were assessed on the medical and vocational evidence and comparative authorities.
14 Oct 2024

柯開榮對明泰建築工程有限公司

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1684
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3284/2022

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success under s63A(2); the trial judge's factual findings were not shown to be plainly wrong and the applicant only reasserted rejected arguments without addressing the judge's reasons; no other fairness justification existed to permit an appeal.
23 Aug 2024

TAMANG SHUSHMA v. PIZZAEXPRESS (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1377
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI2488/2021

The defendant failed to identify any palpable error or arguable point of law or fact that would justify granting leave; the contested matters were primarily factual determinations open on the evidence and therefore leave to appeal was refused and the leave application dismissed with costs.
1 Aug 2024

FUNG PING v. CHAN KA CHING

Citation

[2024] HKDC 1210
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3558/2021

Judge rejected plaintiff's account due to major inconsistencies with contemporaneous records and medical findings, improbability of severe crushing injury given minimal objective medical signs and ambulance/A&E notes, and accepted defendant's consistent account that the car did not roll over or press the plaintiff's foot; accordingly the claim was dismissed for lack of liability.
28 May 2024

CHEUNG PONG CHUN v. JASMINE CUISINE LTD

Citation

[2024] HKDC 842
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI44/2022

Plaintiff's factual account was inconsistent with contemporaneous medical and handwritten statements and implausible in light of objective evidence (photographs and defendant witness evidence showing metal stackable chairs); the more probable explanation is that the plaintiff sat on a missing/fallen chair rather than a defective/collapsed chair caused by defendant; res ipsa loquitur does not apply; on balance of probabilities defendant not liable and claim is dismissed.
30 Apr 2024

GURUNG ROMI v. PIZZAEXPRESS (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1199
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI63/2019

Plaintiff failed to prove defendant breached its duty; even if liability were assumed contributory negligence and a 50% deduction for pre-existing degeneration would reduce any award to nil after accounting for employees' compensation of HK$259,497; accordingly the claim was dismissed and the court made a Nisi Costs Order that plaintiff pay defendant's costs, with provision for taxation and for defendant to claim indemnity costs and interest under Order 22 r23; the plaintiff did not discharge the burden of showing it would be unjust to make the costs order.
27 Mar 2024

NASEEM-ABBAS AND ANOTHER v. RISING AERIAL PLATFORM COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 918
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI406/2019

The court accepted the plaintiffs' evidence and the joint orthopaedic expert's opinions that both plaintiffs suffered the injuries claimed and reached maximal medical improvement with ongoing impairments affecting their ability to perform heavy construction work; accordingly the court allowed the claims for pre-trial and future loss of earnings in full and awarded loss of earning capacity to P1, entered judgment for the stated sums against D1, D2 and D3, and ordered interest and costs nisi against the defendants.
26 Mar 2024

SANDHU HARPREET SINGH (formerly known as HARPREET-SINGH) v. LOU SAI TONG

Citation

[2024] HKDC 469
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI390/2020

On the balance of probabilities the Defendant’s account was preferred: photographic evidence, inherent probabilities and the Defendant’s credible testimony showed the motorcycle was not first in the lane and overtook on the left, striking the Defendant’s front; therefore the Defendant did not cause the collision and is not liable; consequential damages not recoverable.