Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Necessity relevance probative value

Legal area

Court

26 Aug 2010

LAM SIU KONG v. LUCK ON ENTERPRISE LTD t/a OCEAN SUPER SEAFOOD RESTAURANT

Citation

LAM SIU KONG v. LUCK ON ENTERPRISE LTD t/a OCEAN SUPER SEAFOOD RESTAURANT
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI698/2009

Application refused because psychiatric expert evidence was unnecessary and not of sufficient probative value in the circumstances: psychiatric complaints were not raised in earlier records or assessments, orthopaedic and government medical reports were sufficient for assessment of damages, the plaintiff had limited psychiatric consultations, and allowing further expert evidence would be disproportionate and contrary to cost‑effectiveness principles.
28 Oct 2009

TSANG SIU KUI v. GALLANTLY LTD

Citation

TSANG SIU KUI v. GALLANTLY LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI308/2009

The defendant failed to show a prima facie case of relevance or necessity for neurologist evidence because there was no medical evidence of residual neurological disability requiring neurological assessment, other experts did not recommend neurology input, and issues such as urinary tract dysfunction could be addressed by the urologist; therefore leave to adduce the neurologist report was refused and the summons dismissed.
13 Mar 2006

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Citation

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI106/2003

Leave for ergonomics and biometrics, clinical psychologist and pain specialist reports was refused because the plaintiff failed to show these were necessary, relevant and of probative value beyond the substantial government hospital records and common sense assessment by the trial judge; ergonomics evidence on liability was unnecessary because the acts (lifting/throwing rubbish) are within judicial common knowledge; clinical psychologist evidence was unnecessary and the plaintiff had declined further psychological treatment; pain specialist evidence was unnecessary given subjective nature of…
13 Mar 2006

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Citation

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI107/2003

The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that expert reports on ergonomics/biometrics, clinical psychology and pain specialists were necessary, relevant and of sufficient probative value given the existing government hospital records and the routine nature of the work complained of; accordingly leave for those reports was refused. The chiropractor's report was admitted by agreement to be treated like government hospital reports without oral evidence; each party was granted leave to adduce one orthopaedic expert report.
24 Feb 2006

LAM LAI YING v. CHOI MIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

LAM LAI YING v. CHOI MIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCPI1366/2003

The application was dismissed because the report did not provide a firm opinion on causation (it stated only that the accident 'might' have caused deterioration), failed to provide special expertise beyond existing hospital records and witness evidence, and therefore did not meet the necessity,relevance and probative value test for admitting expert evidence; causation is a matter for the judge.

Hong Kong Case Law

LAM SIU KONG v. LUCK ON ENTERPRISE LTD t/a OCEAN SUPER SEAFOOD RESTAURANT

TSANG SIU KUI v. GALLANTLY LTD

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

CHEUNG YUEN FAN SALLY v. HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

LAM LAI YING v. CHOI MIN AND ANOTHER