Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Liability of principal contractor

Legal area

Court

31 Aug 2017

RAI GEHENDRA RAJ v. YICK HING CONSTRUCTION CO LTD

Citation

RAI GEHENDRA RAJ v. YICK HING CONSTRUCTION CO LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI48/2012

The plaintiff was not a credible witness and failed to prove the accident as described on the balance of probabilities; contemporaneous records and testimonial contradictions establish he was employed by Sam Lee not Yick Hing; therefore Yick Hing owed no relevant contractual, tortious or statutory duty in the circumstances and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
26 Jun 2015

SHEN HUAZHU v. ZHU ZE ZHONG t/a TAK BO CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL AND ANOTHER

Citation

SHEN HUAZHU v. ZHU ZE ZHONG t/a TAK BO CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC725/2014

Where the evidence shows the accident occurred at work and the principal contractor is identified with notice under s24(6), liability is established; in the absence of employer payroll evidence the court adopts the admitted daily wage to compute average monthly earnings under s11(2) and applies statutory formulas in ss9,10,10A to quantify compensation, less credit for bona fide advanced payments; award interest and costs accordingly.
1 Apr 2011

HKSAR v. SHIH MAN CHEUNG AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. SHIH MAN CHEUNG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA768/2010

The appeal is dismissed because the magistrate acted within proper sentencing principles: the conspiracy was premeditated, the appellants played leading roles in providing false evidence to the Labour Tribunal causing quantifiable loss, and the magistrate appropriately set a six-month starting point then reduced it by a one-third discount for mitigation to four months; the sentence was not excessive.
16 Jul 2009

CHU CHAN CHEUNG v. CHOI HUNG ENGINEERING CO LTD AND OTHERS

Citation

CHU CHAN CHEUNG v. CHOI HUNG ENGINEERING CO LTD AND OTHERS
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC401/2007

The District Court accepted the Applicant's and corroborating witness evidence over the Respondents', found the Applicant was employed by the 1st Respondent and sustained an industrial injury at the Wong Chuk Hang site on 18 November 2006, held both the 1st subcontractor and the 3rd main contractor liable under the Employees Compensation Ordinance, accepted the Medical Assessment Board's 5% loss of earning capacity and awarded statutory compensation accordingly.
16 Oct 2008

CHOI SIN FUN AND ANOTHER v. CHARTERED ENVIRONMENTALIST LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

CHOI SIN FUN AND ANOTHER v. CHARTERED ENVIRONMENTALIST LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1000/2007

On the balance of probabilities the court found the Deceased was the employee of the 2nd Respondent and the 1st Respondent was the principal contractor; both respondents were therefore jointly liable under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance for statutory compensation and funeral expenses. The court awarded HK$771,160 as employees' compensation and HK$35,000 for funeral expenses, ordered interest at half the District Court judgment rate from the relevant dates to judgment and full judgment rate thereafter, awarded costs, and apportioned 95% of the compensation to the mother and 5% to the br…
14 Sept 2005

MUNG CHI KEUNG v. CHAN KAM WONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

MUNG CHI KEUNG v. CHAN KAM WONG AND ANOTHER
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC299/2005

Applicant had a reasonable excuse for not joining CHAN before trial but, once trial proceedings on 17–18 June 2003 made it likely CHAN was the employer, the applicant lacked a reasonable excuse for further delay; the delay of over 3 years beyond the 2-year limit was unreasonable and would cause real prejudice to ECAFB (loss of CHAN as witness/defendant and likely unjust default judgment), therefore discretion to extend time must be refused.
21 Apr 2004

Gurung Bisan Bahadur v.Wui Shing Cargo Transportation Co Ltd & others

Citation

Gurung Bisan Bahadur v.Wui Shing Cargo Transportation Co Ltd & others
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC665/2002

On the balance of probabilities the MPF documentation established that the applicant was employed by Seawell Transportation Development (HK) Limited from March 2001 until his injury in September 2001; therefore the 2nd respondent, as principal contractor, was liable for the employee's compensation claim and the 1st respondent was not liable. Documentary evidence outweighed the untested hearsay assertions.
18 Feb 1987

NG YICK AND OTHERS v. TUNIS LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG YICK AND OTHERS v. TUNIS LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA90/1986

Notices substantially complied with s.43D despite omissions; the statutory requirement is to alert principal contractors and be measured by their purpose and the circumstances, not by rigid literalism; therefore the notices were valid, the Tribunal had jurisdiction, and the appeal is dismissed.