Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Machine guarding

Legal area

Court

17 Sept 2009

BHIM BAHADUR RAI v. FUNG SHING HONG, HONG KONG (a firm)

Citation

BHIM BAHADUR RAI v. FUNG SHING HONG, HONG KONG (a firm)
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI776/2007

The defendant was liable for negligence, breach of employer's duty and breach of Regulation 4 Cap.59Q for failing to provide proper guarding and a safe system of work; the plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence because the conduct alleged was precisely what the statutory regulation sought to prevent; damages were assessed and reduced by the employee compensation received, with specific sums awarded for PSLA, past and future loss of earnings, loss of earning capacity and special damages, plus ordered interest and costs.
18 Jul 2007

LI SIU PING AND ANOTHER v. PERFECTA DYEING, PRINTING & WEAVING WORKS LTD

Citation

LI SIU PING AND ANOTHER v. PERFECTA DYEING, PRINTING & WEAVING WORKS LTD
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI901/2006

Leave to adduce expert evidence on liability was granted limited to industrial and manufacturing systems engineering because the Machine's complexity, lack of reliable eyewitness evidence and absence of key documents made expert assistance necessary, relevant and probative to determine factual issues about the deceased's position, machine structure, guarding and safe systems of work while preserving the judge's fact-finding and legal determinations; certain passages of the expert report were expunged as inappropriate.
11 Jan 2006

NG CHING v. LINK MACHINERY WORKDS LTD

Citation

NG CHING v. LINK MACHINERY WORKDS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI112/2004

Defendant was negligent and in breach of Regulations 4 and 5 and the employment contract for failing to guard the protruding screws and for failing to provide safety training; Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent because stopping the lathe would have produced sub-standard work and he acted according to common practice taught by the foreman; damages awarded on the assessed heads and amounts in judgment.
9 Sept 1999

YING ZHAN CHUN v. I.N.H. LTD.

Citation

YING ZHAN CHUN v. I.N.H. LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI195/1998

Judge accepted plaintiff's credible evidence, found defendant negligent for instructing use of hand and failing to guard the side opening in breach of Reg.5 Cap.59; transient machine failure was a plausible cause in absence of contrary expert evidence; contributory negligence not established; therefore defendant liable for plaintiff's injury and damages to be assessed.
8 Jul 1992

FONG CHI LEUNG v. WORLD WIDE STATIONERY MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.

Citation

FONG CHI LEUNG v. WORLD WIDE STATIONERY MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV48/1992

The employer breached an absolute statutory duty to effectively guard dangerous parts (Regulations 4 and 5); that breach was a cause of the accident because proper guarding would have prevented the injury; the trial judge correctly apportioned 50% contributory negligence to the plaintiff and the appellate court will not interfere.
7 Nov 1989

LAU SHUN KAM v. LOCK KEE PLASTIC WORKS LTD

Citation

LAU SHUN KAM v. LOCK KEE PLASTIC WORKS LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA4250/1988

Defendant breached statutory duty by failing to provide an effective interlocking guard and was negligent in failing to provide a safe system of work and supervision; the accident would not have occurred if power had been off or an interlocking guard provided; plaintiff was not contributorily negligent; damages awarded accordingly.
9 Mar 1988

CHAN HUNG HOI v. POLYPROPYLENE ALLIANCE LIMITED

Citation

CHAN HUNG HOI v. POLYPROPYLENE ALLIANCE LIMITED
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2709/1986

Defendant was liable because it breached its common law duty and statutory obligations by failing to guard the reciprocating cutter and to ensure adequate instruction/supervision and maintenance; a transient malfunction caused the injury which proper guarding or maintenance would likely have prevented, and there was no contributory negligence by the plaintiff; damages awarded accordingly ($117,941).
12 Feb 1987

CHUI YU YAU v. CHAN PAK LUK t/a FUNG LOK PLASTIC FACTORY

Citation

CHUI YU YAU v. CHAN PAK LUK t/a FUNG LOK PLASTIC FACTORY
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3173/1986

No liability: at the time the plaintiff reached into the machine the primary automatic guard (the gate) had stopped the machine; the removable top grill was not required while the machine was not in motion; the plaintiff, an experienced operator, removed/failed to replace the grill and acted contrary to safe procedure; no breach of statutory duty or negligence by employer was established and the plaintiff was sole author of his injury.
15 Jan 1986

CHUNG KEI v. SO YIU AND LEUNG SHING, t/a WAI YIP PLASTIC METAL FACTORY AND OTHERS

Citation

CHUNG KEI v. SO YIU AND LEUNG SHING, t/a WAI YIP PLASTIC METAL FACTORY AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA9864/1983

Defendants breached statutory obligations and were negligent in failing to provide proper interlocking guards and in permitting unsafe shop practices (rubber bands, starting by thumping); plaintiff's omission to neutralize the machine did not attract substantial blame in context and was not a proximate cause sufficient to reduce liability; defendants held 100% liable and plaintiff awarded damages totaling HKD 331,578.
7 Jul 1983

CHUK WAI SUN v. SOCO TEXTILES (HONG KONG) LTD

Citation

CHUK WAI SUN v. SOCO TEXTILES (HONG KONG) LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA3957/1979

The judge accepted the defendant's expert evidence that the machine configuration made the plaintiff's account impossible and found the injury resulted from contact with the Kirschner beater (contrary to the plaintiff's testimony); because the plaintiff failed to prove negligence or causation by the defendant on the balance of probabilities, the claim was dismissed.