Ho Nuen and Others v. Edward Paul Court
Read the full judgment text of HCA 2169/1970 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment.
1. This is an application for assessment of damages pursuant to an Order dated the 22nd September, 1971.
|
HCA002169/1970 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ACTION NO. 2169 OF 1970 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Mr. B.L. Jones, Assistant Registrar, in Chambers. Date of Judgment: 8th day of December, 1971. ----------------- DECISION ----------------- 1. This is an application for assessment of damages pursuant to an Order dated the 22nd September, 1971. 2. Each of the three plaintiffs suffered personal injuries as a result of a road traffic accident that occurred on the 8th March, 1969 when a-motor car driven by the defendant collided with the three plaintiffs as they were crossing Connaught Road Central, Hong Kong. The 1st plaintiff who is now aged 37 is the mother of the 2nd plaintiff, Yeung Wai See, a daughter now aged 6 and the 3rd plaintiff, Yeung Fu Cheong, a son now aged 7. The 1st plaintiff is separated from her husband who left her in October 1968. She receives no financial support from her husband as she does not know his present whereabouts. 3. As a result of the accident the 1st plaintiff suffered a haematoma over the left parietal region, abrasions and bruising to the dorsum of the left hand and a large area of abrasion over the anterior aspect of the left thigh. She was treated for these injuries at the Queen Mary Hospital on the date of the accident and was discnarged. 4. The 2nd plaintiff suffered a laceration 2" long over the right forehead, a 3" by 2 1/2" laceration flap over the post surface of the right calf and a fracture of the right tibia and fibula. 5. The 3rd plaintiff suffered abdominal pain and pain in both legs and a laceration of about 1 1/2" long in the medial side of the left upper leg. The right leg was swollen and movement was impaired. An X-ray of the right lower leg showed a fracture of tibia and fibula. 6. In an agreed medical report dated 20th July 1971 Dr. Wedderburn stated that none of the plaintiffs has any residual disability as a result of the accident. Although the first plaintiff complained of weakness in her left hand and forearm Dr. Wedderburn found no reason for this claim and said that the left hand is completely normal. Further he is of the opinion that the headaches of which the 1st plaintiff complains are not attributable to the accident. The 2nd plaintiff has an unsightly scar on the back of her right leg, but Dr. Wedderburn stated that the healing of the fracture is perfect. In respect of the 3rd plaintiff Dr. Wedderburn states that there is no visible difference between his right and left legs and he walks perfectly without limping. He anticipates that in 2 years it will probably be impossible to see where the fracture was in the X-ray. 7. After her husband left her the 1st plaintiff worked as a construction worker at $10 per day but later sold sweet potatoes earning $20 per day. The 1st plaintiff said that due to the accident she can no longer sell sweet potatoes but she is now able to look after children from which she derives an income of about $200 per month. The 1st plaintiff obtained her present employment after 1 1/2 years from the date of the accident, and during this period she did not work. 8. The defendant has agreed the special damage of $100 in respect of the loss of the handcart goods and clothes but has disputed the other items of special damages relating to loss of earnings, travelling expenses and cost of nourishing food. It is quite clear from the evidence that the 1st plaintiff has grossly exaggerated her claim in respect of the items in dispute. The 1st plaintiff admitted that the total cost of travelling to the hospital to see her two children for a period of three months at $1.00 per day would be $90. I shall therefore allow the sum of $90 for travelling expenses. Upon the medical evidence which is before me there can be no justification for any claim for loss of earnings for the short report of Dr. E.P. Chan dated the 7th October 1969 says that the 1st plaintiff's X-rays were clear and she was treated and discharged. The claim under this head is therefore disallowed. 9. Further no evidence medical or otherwise has been produced to support the plaintiff's claim for nourishing food, with the result that no award can be made in respect of this claim. Accordingly the special damage will amount to $190. 10. The injuries suffered by all the three plaintiffs in this case can only be described as minor with the result that general damages for pain and suffering cannot be high. 11. Having regard to all the circumstances I shall make the following awards of general damages:-
12. The total award of damages including special damages will therefore be $6,190.00. 13. From each of the awards to the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs the sum of $500 will be deducted and paid to the 1st plaintiff in respect of their maintenance. The balance of the damages for the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs will be invested by the Registrar in his absolute discretion as he thinks fit with power from time to time to make advancements of income and or capital for their education and maintenance. 14. Costs of this application will be paid by the defendant to be taxed on the District Court Scale V and there will be the usual taxation under the Legal Aid (Scals of Fees) Regulations Cap. 91. There will be a certificate for counsel. 15. Dated this the 8th day of December, 1971.
Representation: |