B.S.C. Colouringliving Ltd v. Tsang Tze Leung Eddie and Another
Read the full judgment text of DCCJ 3441/2018 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 12 July 2019.
1. By an interlocutory judgment dated 25 October 2018, the 1 st and 2 nd defendants were adjudged to pay the plaintiff damages to be assessed and costs.
|
DCCJ3441/2018 [2019] HKDC 922 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CIVIL ACTION NO 3441 OF 2018 --------------------
-------------------- Before: Master B. Mak in Court Date of Hearing: 18 June 2019 Date of Judgment: 12 July 2019 ---------------------------------------- ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES ---------------------------------------- Introduction 1.By an interlocutory judgment dated 25 October 2018, the 1st and 2nd defendants were adjudged to pay the plaintiff damages to be assessed and costs. 2.At the hearing of the assessment of damages, the 1st defendant was present. He said the 2nd defendant was owned by him. However, as the requirements under Order 5A rule 2 of the Rules of the District Court have not been complied with, the 2nd defendant was treated as absent at the hearing. The claim 3.The plaintiff’s claim is for damages due to the negligent driving of a light goods vehicle registration No JK1296 by the 1st defendant on 24 April 2017 at the carpark of Sing Win Factory Building, Nos 15-17 Shing Yip Street, Kwun Tong, Kowloon causing damage to the plaintiff’s private car registration No PX9734 (“the plaintiff’s car”). The 2nd defendant was the employer of the 1st defendant at the material time. The evidence 4.After the accident, the following parts of the plaintiff’s car were damaged and had to be replaced:-
5.Further, the bonnet panel and the off-side front door pillar were damaged and had to be repaired. 6.Accordingly, the following costs have incurred:-
7.The 1st defendant did not seek to challenge the evidence of the plaintiff. 8.I am satisfied that the plaintiff has suffered loss in the sum of $85,938.20 as a result of the accident. Interest 9.Mr Jonathan Lau, who appeared for the plaintiff, asked for interest at the best lending rate from the date of the accident until the date of assessment and thereafter at judgment rate to the date of payment. 10.The 1st defendant opposed interest to be calculated from the date of accident as the repair costs were not paid on that day. 11.Section 49 of the District Court Ordinance provides:-
12.In respect of the repair costs, $15,000 was paid on 20 June 2017 and the balance of $70,250 was paid on 25 July 2017. I agree with the 1st defendant that interest should not run from the date of accident. 13.As the moneys were paid on different dates, I take the view that allowing interest to run from 25 July 2017 would be just for both parties. Conclusion and order 14.For the foregoing reasons, I make an award of $85,938.20 in favour of the plaintiff together with interest thereon at the best lending rate (ie 5.125% per annum) from 25 July 2017 to the date of the interlocutory judgment (ie 25 October 2018) and thereafter at judgment rate until payment. Costs 15.By way of summary assessment, the costs of the assessment of damages are assessed at $33,155.60. Such costs shall be paid by the 1st and 2nd defendants to the plaintiff.
Mr Jonathan Lau of Leung & Lau, Solicitors LLP, for the plaintiff The 1st defendant was not represented and was acting in person The 2nd defendant was not represented and did not appear | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||