Chan Pak Wai v. Golden Chaozhou Catering Ltd.

DCEC000820/2001

DCEC820/2001

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION CASE NO. 820 OF 2001

____________________

____________________

Coram: Deputy Judge R Yu in Court

Date of Judgment: 27 June 2002

__________________

J U D G M E N T

__________________

1.This is an application taken out by the applicant under the Employees Compensation Ordinance for compensation under section 9, 10 and 10A of the Ordinance.

2.Judgment on liability has been entered against the respondent, and this morning I am here to assess the compensation that should be paid to the applicant under the said sections.

3.The respondent is absent today and party proceed on ex parte basis. There is only one witness in this case, which is the applicant himself, and his evidence has been unchallenged, and I accept his evidence in full.

4.His evidence is such that he was born on 22 February 1974, and therefore he is now 28 years of age. As a result of the accident, he suffered a permanent loss of earning capacity of 1.5 per cent. This is his evidence, and there is a certificate of assessment produced, and there is no appeal against that assessment.

5.I accept that is the loss of earning capacity in assessing his compensation under section 9 of the ordinance.

6.Given his age, the formula for calculating his compensation under section 9 has been rightly set out by his solicitor, which is $12,000, his salary before his injury, times 96 months times 1.5 per cent, and the final figure is $17,280. I accordingly make that award under section 9.

7.The applicant also claims compensation under section 10, which is his sick leave allowance. He was given sick leave after the accident by a doctor from 17 February 2001 until 20 April 2001. This is also confirmed by the certificate of assessment, and surely there is no objection to that, and I accept his evidence that he has been granted sick leave by doctors. He should be entitled to four-fifths of his wages and, as I have found earlier, I accept his wages before the accident is $12,000, and the sick leave period is for 63 days. The final figure is $20,160, and I accordingly make that award.

8.Finally, the applicant also claims reimbursement for his medical expenses under section 10A. This includes firstly, medical expenses charged by the Prince of Wales Hospital on the day of accident and when he was hospitalised. That is in the sum of $64. The applicant also claims for aftercare by the Prince of Wales Hospital on three occasions at $44 each. And finally, there was one claim for his therapy treatment. The receipts for these last two items were lost, but there is evidence from the applicant himself that he did incur those losses, and I accept his evidence. Accordingly, I award him $244 under this item.

9.The applicant concedes that prior to the application, he received an advance payment of $3,840 from the respondent, and he agrees that this sum should be taken away from the judgment.

10.As such, I borrow paragraph 15 of the applicant's solicitor's skeleton argument, which sets out the whole calculation, and after setting off the advance payment, I award a total sum of $33,844 to the applicant, with interest at 4.07 per cent per annum from day of accident until today, and thereafter judgment rate until full payment.

11.The applicant is also entitled to costs of this action against the respondent, to be taxed if not agreed, and the applicant's own costs, to be taxed in accordance with Legal Aid Regulations.

Representation:

Ms E Fong, assigned by Legal Aid Department, for the Applicant

Golden Chaozhou Catering Limited formerly trading as Golden Chaozhou Seafood Restaurant, Respondent in Person, absent