Wong Yuk Tin v. Chung Chuen Lam
Read the full judgment text of HCA 986/1982 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 18 April 1983.
1. The Plaintiff (aged 43) was injured when the road roller he was driving overturned at a construction site at Wo hop Shek on the 23rd November 1979.
|
HCA000986/1982
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG HIGH COURT ____________ BETWEEN
_______________ Coram: Master Hansen in Chambers Date: 18 April 1983 --------------------------------------- ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES --------------------------------------- 1. The Plaintiff (aged 43) was injured when the road roller he was driving overturned at a construction site at Wo hop Shek on the 23rd November 1979. 2. As a result of the accident the Plaintiff suffered partial degloving of hand; fractures of three fingers of the right hand and injuries to his left ankle. Various medical reports were placed before me. These established that the power of the Plaintiff's right hand was only 70% of that of the left one. Also the injuries to his left ankle caused him to limp and he suffered considerable pain. Colonel Craig in his report put the plaintiff's disability at 25%. It was quite clear from the medical reports that the Plaintiff could no longer follow his earlier work as a road roller driver. Pain suffering and Loss of Amenities 3. Mr Barretto referred me to a number of relevant decisions although none were exactly the same as this case:-
4. None of the cases cited involved the combination of injuries suffered by the Plaintiff. Mr Barretto submitted that taking into account the cases cited, the combination of the Plaintiff's two injuries and inflation the award should be properly in the range of $40,000 to $50,000. Clearly, the injury to the Plaintiff's hand is the most serious. Col. Craig assessed the Plaintiff's disability at 25% and allowing for inflation I award $50,000. Future Loss of Earnings 5. As I stated earlier the Plaintiff could no longer work as a road roller driver. The Plaintiff recommenced work in June of 1980. In evidence he stated this was work with an interior decorator. He stated his earnings there were $2,000 for the. first 4 months and then $2,200 until the end of January 1983 when he was laid off. His evidence was that he only got this job through the introduction of a friend. He further said that his disability meant in future he would be limited to working as a watchman or a janitor and he expected to earn around $1,300 - $l,350 p.m. His evidence was that the interior decoration firm he had worked for had a policy of employing disabled people but this was not the practice in the building trade. I accept that evidence. Mr Barretto submitted that it would be difficult for a person of the Plaintiff's age to retrain himself. This I accept. He further submitted that in view of the Plaintiff's evidence that road roller drivers now earn $4,000 per month and more it would be reasonable to assess the plaintiff's monthly loss at $2,000. However, I do not think the plaintiff's disability is so serious as to limit his earning ability to the region of $l,300 p.m. He has earned more than that since the accident, albeit in a firm which supported disabled workers. I think a more appropriate figure for monthly loss is $1,700. Mr Barretto submitted a proper multiplier for a person the Plaintiff's age would be 12. (i.e. 144 months). This I accept 38 months have elapsed since the accident leaving 106 months of future loss. I therefore award 6. $1,700 x 106 =$180,200 Loss of Earnings 7. From the 23rd of November until the 15th of June 1980 the Defendant was off work. His loss was $3,000 per month. Accordingly I award $21,000. 8. From the June 198O until the end of January 1983 the plaintiff's loss was $1,000 per month. That period was 31 months and accordingly I award $31,000. That makes a total of $52,000. Medical Expenses 9. The plaintiff produced receipts to justify his claim. Accordingly I award $395 as claimed. Wife's Travelling Expenses 10. The plaintiff justified this claim and I award $400. Plaintiff's Travelling Expenses 11. The Plaintiff justified his many trips to physiotherapy. I award the $360 claimed. Special Food and Medicine 12. The Plaintiff claimed a modest $200. This is awarded. Crutch Rental 13. I award $75 Summary:-
14. There will be interest on the general damages at the rate of 14% per annum from the date of the service of the writ to judgment and at the rate of 7% per annum on the sum of $53,430 (i.e. Special damages excluding (a)) from the date of the accident until judgment. 15. There will be costs to the Plaintiff to be taxed in accordance with Legal Aid Regulations. There will be a certificate for counsel.
Representation: Mr R. Barretto instructed by Day & Co for Plaintiff Defendant absent | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||