Rai Raj Kumar v. Pacific Crown Security Services Ltd and Others

Case No.HCPI 312/2016
Court
High Court CFI
Date21 Aug 2017
Judge—
Case Document
100%

HCPI 312/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

PERSONAL INJURIES ACTION NO 312 OF 2016

___________

BETWEEN
  RAI RAJ KUMAR Plaintiff
and
  PACIFIC CROWN SECURITY SERVICES LIMITED 1st Defendant
  DRAGAGES–CHINA HARBOUR–VSL JOINT VENTURE 2nd Defendant
  BAUER HONG KONG LIMITED 3rd Defendant

___________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Sakhrani in Court

Dates of Hearing: 31 July and 2 August 2017

Date of Judgment: 21 August 2017

Date of Corrigendum: 13 October 2017

____________________

CORRIGENDUM

____________________


Please note the following corrigendum in the Judgment dated 21 August 2017:

1.In line I – J at paragraph 72 on page 19,

“ The multiplicand is the said sum of $37,574 per month.”

should read:

“ The multiplicand is the sum of $22,713 per month.”

2.In line F – H at paragraph 76 on page 20,

“ The multiplicand should be $20,924 ($37,574 − $4,000 − $12,650).

$20,924 × 12 × 11.65 = $ 2,925,175.

I would award loss of future earnings at $2,925,175.”

should read:

“ The multiplicand should be $22,713 ($39,363 − $4,000 − $12,650).

$22,713 × 12 × 11.65 = $ 3,175,277.

I would award loss of future earnings at $3,175,277.”

3.In line E at paragraph 80 on page 21,

“ (d) Loss of future earnings $ 2,925,175 ”

should read:

“ (d) Loss of future earnings $ 3,175,277 ”

4.In line I at paragraph 80 on page 21,

“ Total $ 4,325,275.30 ”

should read:  

“ Total $ 4,575,377.30 ”

5.In line M at paragraph 82 on page 21,

“ I give judgment to P against the defendants for the said sum of $4,325,275.30 with interest as set out above.”

should read:

“ I give judgment to P against the defendants for the said sum of $4,575,377.30 with interest as set out above.”

  (Thomas WAN)
  Clerk to Deputy High Court Judge Sakhrani

Summaries and metadata are generated from the judgment. Report an error

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCPI 312/2016