Leung Kwong v. Luen Fat Chemical Production Co Ltd

Read the full judgment text of HCA 6789/1982 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 13 December 1982.

1. On the 29th May 1980 the Plaintiff, then aged 47, injured his right hand when it was pulled into a high temperature oven of a plastic extruding machine at the Defendant's factory.

Cites 2 cases

Case No.HCA 6789/1982
Court
High Court CFI
Date13 Dec 1982
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCA006789/1982

6789/82

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

HIGH COURT

____________

BETWEEN

LEUNG KWONG Plaintiff

AND

LUEN FAT CHEMICAL PRODUCTION CO LTD Defendant

____________

Coram: Master Hansen in Chambers

Date: 13 December 1982

__________________________

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

__________________________

1. On the 29th May 1980 the Plaintiff, then aged 47, injured his right hand when it was pulled into a high temperature oven of a plastic extruding machine at the Defendant's factory.

2. As a result, the Plaintiff suffered a badly crushed right hand and forearm. On the day of the accident, an emergency full wrist amputation of the right hand was done at P.M.H. Because the wound was badly contaminated it had to be left open. On the 8th June 1980 a further operation was carried out to reshape the bone ends and a skin graft from the thigh was carried out to close the wound. On the 15th October 1980 a small operation was carried out under local anaesthetic to excise the head of the ulna. He was discharged on the following day. Dr Ma, who gave evidence of this treatment, stated that the medical Board decided that the Plaintiff after being fitted with an artificial limb was quite capable of carrying out his duties in his primary employment - caring for nurses quarters at Castle Peak Hospital. However, according to the F.I. of the Labour Department Mr Hung, the Medical Board stated he was suffering from a 50% disability. One can only presume that such an assessment related to his secondary employment at the plactics factory where he was injured.

3. At the time of the accident the Plaintiff was married with 6 children and living in Tuen Mun. He was (and still is) employed in the nurses quarters at Castle Peak Hospital taking care of the laundry, phone calls and other minor matters. His income was $1,425 P.m. At the time of the accident he was employed part time by the Defendant company. His evidence, which I accept, was that he had worked part time for the Defendant company for 3-4 years. He worked either 6 or 7 days a week and earned on average $1,200 p.m. from that part time job.

4. The Plaintiff stated he spent 23 days in hospital. Before the accident he was right handed and despite the artificial limb that has been fitted he suffers very real inconvenience. He detailed difficulties he encounters whilst eating and dressing. He said he was embarrassed to go out and meet people now and as a result does not engage in the social activities (such as mahjong) that he undertook before the accident. That I can understand because the artificial limb is unsightly and the Plaintiff's embarrassment is a normal reaction. He was off work at his primary employment for 8 months. However, he received full pay for 6 months and ½ pay for the remaining two months.

5. Because of the accident his wife took one week's leave. Also, she visited him every day whilst he was in hospital. During his stay in hospital his wife bought him the usual nutritious foods. On his release from hospital he continued to take such foods for another 4-5 months. Also following the accident he had to make 40 trips to the South Kwai Chung Jockey Club Clinic relating to the fitting of his artificial limb. The return journey. cost $4.40.

6. General Damages:-

7. Pain suffering and Loss of Amenities

            Mr Wong firstly referred me to the categories of disablement set forth in the decision of Cons J.A. in Lee Ting Lam v Leung Kam-ming [1980] HKLR. 657. He submitted that the Plaintiff was at the top end of the serious injury category where award, range from $60,000 to $80,000. He referred me to similar cases where the range was from $60,000 to $75,000. (See Ty Kwei-sang v Fong Sui-hoi HCA 6191/1980 where Mr Registrar Roy award $65,000 for the loss of 4 fingers of the right hand at mid palm and damages to the function of the thumb; To Wai Bun v Hon Hing Manufacturing Co Ltd HCA 4259/79 where Jones J awarded $65,000 for the loss of the index and little fingers of the left hand; Wong Kwong To v Acme Cassette Manufacturing Ltd HCA 2531/80 where Mr Registrar Barrington-Jones awarded $60,000 for the loss of the thumb and radial 3 fingers of the left hand; Cheng Yuk Lam v Delight Textile and Knitting Factory Co Ltd HCA 9135/81 where Bewley J awarded $75,000 for the loss of all 4 fingers of the right hand at the metacarpo-phalangeal joint; Chan Wai Alan v Luk Shuet King HCA 5088/79 where Mr Commissioner Barnes (as he then was) awarded $40,000 for the partial loss of 2 fingers of the right hand and the whole of the middle finger of the right hand) as Mr Wong rightly pointed out all of these cases concerned injuries less serious than those suffered by the Plaintiff, none involved the complete loss of the right hand. I agree with Mr Wong that the injury suffered by the Plaintiff places him at the top of the serious category in Lee Ting-lam v Leung Kam-ming. Further in that case Cons Jeff said at Page 659 "The figures we have arrived at paint the picture as it is today. As time passes t they too will have to be undated." In this regard Mr Wong referred me to the decision of Master Betts in Wong Pak (alias Yee Yick Poy) v Ly Po Chui HCA 5463/81. In that case Master Betts referred to the passage from Lee Ting Lam v Leung Kam Ming mentioned shove and went on to say at Page 5 "That was two years ago and I propose to add 20% to my assessment under this head for just that reason." I agree with that statement. Having considered the authorities I am satisfied that the disability caused by the Plaintiff's injury place him at the top of the serious category in Lee Ting-lam v Leung Kam-ming (supra) and adopting Master Betts' comments in Wong Pak v Ng Po-chui (supra) I award $96,000 for pain suffering and loss of amenities.

Special Damages

(a) Loss of earnings

(i) Primary employment

            As I stated earlier the defendant was on ½ pay for 2 months in his primary employment and suffered loss of $1,465.00 which is the sum I award.

(ii) Secondary employment

            The Plaintiff's evidence was that he had worked part time for the Defendant Company for 3-4 years. Even allowing for the change in economic climate there is no evidence to suggest that this employment would have ceased. His average income was $1,200 p.m. Loss of earnings from the 29th May 1980 until the date of the hearing are $1,200 x 31 = $37,200 which is the sum I award.

(b) Loss of Future earnings

(i) Primary Employment

The Defendant suffered no loss.

(ii) Secondary employment

            As I said earlier there was no evidence to suggest that this would not continue. Mr Wong referred me to To Wai-bun v Hui Hing Manufacturing Co Lrd (Supra) and suggest a multiplier of 8. I think he is correct. The Plaintiff's loss is $1,200 p.m. The loss of future earnings therefore is 1,200 x 12 x 8 = $115,200 which sum I award.

(c) Clothing ruined in the accident

I accept the figure claimed and award $30.

(d) Wife's travelling expenses

I accept the figure claimed and award $101.20.

(e) Plaintiff's Travelling expenses

I accept the figure claimed and award $176.00.

(f) Loss of wife's earnings for 1 week

            I accept that in view of the serious nature of the Plaintiff's injury it was proper for the wife to take a week off work to attend at the hospital. I accept the sum as claimed and award $347.40.

(g) Nourishing food

            The total claim was $2,205. Following To Ki v Chan Kit Lam and another HCA 2224/1980 I allow this claim on the basis of $10 per day for 6 months a sum of $1,825.00.

Summary : -

8. There will be an award as follows:-

1. General Damages

$96,000.00

2. Special Damages

(a) Loss of earnings

$38,665.00
(b) Loss of future eamnings

$115,200.00
(c) Clothing ruined in accident

30.00
(d) Wife's travelling expenses

101.20
(e) Plaintiff's travelling expenses

176.00
(f) Loss of wife's earnings

347.40
(g) Nourishing food 1,825.00 156,344.60
_________
$252,344,60
=======

9. There will be a credit in the sum of $30,160.00 for Workman's Compensation already received.

10. There will be interest on the general damages at the rate of 14% p.a. from the date of service of the unit to the date of the hearing and at the rate of 7% p. a. on the sum of $41,144.60 (being special damages at (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) from the date of the accident.

11. Costs to the Plaintiff to be taxed under Legal Aid Regulations with a certificate for counsel.

(J.W. Hansen)

Master

Representation:

Mr Wong instructed by HO & Wong for Plaintiff.

Defendant absent.