Read the full judgment text of CACV 000086/2001 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 11 September 2001 before Rogers VP, Keith JA, Le Pichon JA.
Tort – employer's duty of care – psychiatric nurse attacked by visitor – whether real risk of attack ought to have been appreciated – whether reasonable precautions required – glass screen around reception counter – panic button – causation – vicarious liability for alleged negligence of senior registered nurse. The Plaintiff, an enrolled psychiatric nurse employed by the Hospital Authority, was attacked with concentrated sulphuric acid by a visitor (Madam Choy) at the Yung Fung Shee Psychiatric Centre on 23 October 1996, suffering severe scarring. He sued his employer, which had not enclosed the reception counter or installed a panic button, although both were introduced after the attack. Cheung J found the Authority liable; the Authority appealed. Held, dismissing the appeal: (1) applying The Wagon Mound (No. 2), a psychiatric centre naturally has persons of known instability visiting it, so the risk of an eruption of violence in the waiting room was a real one which the Authority ought to have appreciated, even though Madam Choy was not a patient at the Centre and the use of acid was unforeseeable in form. (2) Reasonable precautions included enclosing the reception counter with a glass screen and installing a panic button; the post-attack adoption of these measures showed they were practicable, and they were not antithetical to psychiatric treatment. (3) On causation, the Defendant had not shown that the Plaintiff would undoubtedly have been injured even with these precautions: the alarm of a panic button and the rapid arrival of help might have stopped or paused Madam Choy, and the Plaintiff would have had a safer option than acting instinctively. (4) On the alternative ground, Nurse Wong, the senior registered nurse in charge, was negligent: he knew Madam Choy was likely emotionally unstable, failed to assess the risk that bluntly confronting her with the United Christian Hospital referral would provoke her, and delegated delivery of the note to an enrolled nurse before leaving the scene; the Authority was vicariously liable. The Court of Appeal declined to give weight to a police statement from Nurse Wong not put in issue by plea or evidence. Appeal dismissed; costs of the appeal to the Plaintiff; Plaintiff's costs to be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations.
Legal issues: Whether the Hospital Authority breached its employer duty of care by failing to take precautions against risk of attack on reception-counter nurses · Whether the breach of duty caused the Plaintiff's injuries · Whether Nurse Wong was negligent such that the Authority is vicariously liable
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; the Hospital Authority is liable to the Plaintiff in negligence both for its own breach of employer duty of care and vicariously for the negligence of Nurse Wong.
Cited by 6 cases