Choi Kwok Hing, William v. Ching Ya Fabric Ltd.

DCEC000797/2001

DCEC797/2001

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION CASE NO. 797 OF 2001

Coram: H H Judge Carlson in Court

Date of Judgment: 22 February 2002

________________

R U L I N G

________________

1.This is an application under section 14(4) of the Employees' Compensation Ordinance for the court to allow the Applicant to bring his application for compensation, notwithstanding the expiry of the two year period within which he should have brought the application.

2.The accident itself occurred on 5 March 1999. The application is dated October 2001, so it is some seven months or so out of time.

3.The facts of the matter are very straightforward. The Applicant alleges that whilst in the course of his employment with the Respondent, he was riding a motorcycle in Shenzhen. He skidded, fell to the ground, sustained injuries to his hand, leg, knee and shoulder and neck. The application itself is supported by an affirmation of the Applicant dated 27 December of last year and the affirmation shows that at first, the Applicant thought that he was not particularly seriously injured.

4.There were negotiations with the Respondent and with the Respondent's insurers. As often happens, and this is not a criticism, the insurers were minded to settle on a basis which was as cheap as possible to them. The Applicant was not, at that stage, minded to accept what was on offer. He thought that his injuries were not particularly serious and that is certainly what the insurance company was telling him, and that was the basis of their rather modest offer at that time.

5.But subsequently, it appeared that he had in fact damaged nerve endings to his hand. The Medical Assessment Board then produced their assessment showing that his permanent disability is a high one, 20 per cent.

6.I think, when one looks at all the circumstances and the reasons for the delay, this is a proper case in which to extend time. I take the view that the Applicant has made out a reasonable excuse for the reasons that appear in his affirmation, and so he must have leave.

7.In those circumstances, the Respondent must file its answer within 21 days. List of earnings within 21 days. The application will be adjourned sine die with liberty to restore.

8.Costs of this call-over and of the application to extend time will be costs in the cause. Legal Aid taxation.

Representation:

Present: Mr Nick Lee, of Legal Aid Department, for the Applicant

Respondent represented by Wan Sao-mui