Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Liability of driver

Legal area

Court

21 Nov 2007

CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI962/2004

The judge preferred the plaintiff's account and the physical and documentary evidence over the 1st defendant's explanation, finding the defendant had failed to keep proper control of the vehicle (likely having dozed), which caused the collision; accordingly the defendants are liable and damages were assessed and awarded as set out in the judgment.
12 May 1998

CHAN SIU LUN v. HUI CHO YEE AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHAN SIU LUN v. HUI CHO YEE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI120/1997

The 2nd Defendant was negligent for failing to stop, turning into Cloudview Road at an excessive speed and failing to keep a proper lookout; the 1st Defendant is vicariously liable; the Plaintiff was contributorily negligent by dashing from between stationary vehicles, apportionment 50%/50%; damages and interest assessed accordingly.
12 Sept 1983

THE QUEEN v. NG CHOR-CHEUNG

Citation

THE QUEEN v. NG CHOR-CHEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC1056/1983

The word 'uses' in Section 8 of the Road Traffic Ordinance and Regulation 101 of the Road Traffic (Construction and Use) Regulations includes a driver who drives a vehicle with defective brakes; accordingly the appellant's conviction for using a vehicle with defective brakes is valid and the appeal is dismissed; an owner's liability requires proof of ownership and use, not mere ownership alone.
10 Apr 1975

WONG KIN-KEUNG v. LEE WOON (OR WAN) SUN AND OTHERS

Citation

WONG KIN-KEUNG v. LEE WOON (OR WAN) SUN AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA445/1973

On credibility and the admitted evidence (including the Rule 11 statement) the court found the first defendant solely negligent in attempting an unsafe overtaking manoeuvre; there was no satisfactory evidence of negligence by the second or third defendants; damages were awarded accordingly and quantified using the multiplier method.
12 Mar 1973

CHOI SING TONG v. ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS

Citation

CHOI SING TONG v. ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1938/1972

The bus driver was negligent for failing to stop at an illuminated red warning light and for not heeding the siren; whether the light was a formally prescribed traffic signal under the regulations is irrelevant to civil liability because drivers must heed actual warnings; consequently the bus driver and his employer are liable to the plaintiff for damages.
5 Dec 1972

TSE KUNG FU v. YIP HING LING AND ANOTHER

Citation

TSE KUNG FU v. YIP HING LING AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1165/1972

The court found the first defendant negligent in driving into a pedestrian on a zebra crossing and rejected the defence of contributory negligence because the plaintiff reasonably relied on two lanes of stopped traffic and the crossing signals; accordingly the defendant was fully liable and the court awarded compensatory damages quantified on the evidence.
5 Dec 1969

LAM KANG FAI v. TONG MIU AND ANOTHER

Citation

LAM KANG FAI v. TONG MIU AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1699/1967

The driver was liable for negligence because witnesses established the pedestrians were visible on the traffic island and crossing at a normal pace, no horn was sounded and no effective braking was observed, and circumstantial evidence supported impact near the crown of the road; accordingly damages were awarded and apportioned as set out.

Hong Kong Case Law

CHAN FU MAN v. LAM FOOK LOI AND ANOTHER

CHAN SIU LUN v. HUI CHO YEE AND ANOTHER

THE QUEEN v. NG CHOR-CHEUNG

WONG KIN-KEUNG v. LEE WOON (OR WAN) SUN AND OTHERS

CHOI SING TONG v. ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS

TSE KUNG FU v. YIP HING LING AND ANOTHER

LAM KANG FAI v. TONG MIU AND ANOTHER