Wong Tai v. Tang Chee Yan

HCA003360/1973

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

ACTION NO. 3360 OF 1973

-----------------

-----------------

Coram: Mr. Registrar Doyle in Chamners

Date of Judgment:12th August, 1975.

Mr. Robert Tang instructed by Messrs. H.M. So & Co. for the Plaintiff.

Mr. Simon Ip (Johnson, Stokes & Master) for the Defendant.

-----------------

DECISION

-----------------

1. This is an assessment of the Plaintiff's damages under the Fatal Accidents Ordinance and the Law Amendment and Reform (Consolidation) Ordinance, arising as a result of the death of the Plaintiff's son Wong Shiu Yuk alias Wong Siu Yuk in a road traffic accident which occurred on the 9th December, 1972. On that date at about 14.20 hours the deceased was driving his motor cycle No. AY 2134 along a gradual slope at Pokfulam Road, Victoria, in the Colony of Hong Kong in a southerly direction when he was involved in a collision with a goods vehicle No. AF 5010. This goods vehicle was then owned and driven by Defendant. The deceased thereby received injuries which resulted in his death.

2. Interlocutory judgment against the Defendant for damages to be assessed and costs to be taxed was entered on the 2nd June, 1975.

3. Dependency was claimed on behalf of the following persons:

4. The ages of the dependants given here are ages at the date of issue of the writ which was about a year after the date of the accident.

5. Special damages were agreed at $1,480 for funeral expenses and $50 for damage to deceased's clothing.

6. The Plaintiff, Wong Tai, gave evidence. She said that deceased at the time of his death was employed as a repairer of electrical equipment and that he used to earn about $700 per month. She said that deceased used to give her $400 per month. At New Year when he received double pay he used to give her double allowance. He was always generous towards his brothers and sisters.

7. Plaintiff works as a hawker and earns about $300 per month. Her husband Wong Ching, father of the deceased, is aged 60 years. He is blind in one eye and cannot see clearly with the other. He is unable to work.

8. There are five minor children. All are attending school. Plaintiff said she hoped that each child would be able to complete secondary schooling.

9. Mr. Ip for the Defendant submitted that this is not a case where a multiplier should be selected and the amount of the yearly dependency multiplied thereby. This he said would not give a realistic assessment of the actual prospective loss to the dependants. He suggested that the question should be approached by assessing the likely term of dependency of each dependant.

10. As to the amount of the deceased man's contribution to the family prior to his death Mr. Ip said that it should be apportioned equally between each of the nine members of the family who were then dependent thus giving to each member a share of about $48 per month.

11. Since the death of the deceased one of those nine dependants a boy named Wong Siu Chor has died and a girl named Wong Shiu Ngor became self-supporting at about the time of deceased's death or soon afterwards Mr. Tang did not pursue any claim for either of these persons.

12. Dealing with the remaining 7 dependants Mr. Ip suggested a multiplier of 6 in the case of both Plaintiff and her husband, a multiplier of 2 in the case of Wong Siu Keung a multiplier of 8 in the case of Wong Siu Fu, a multiplier of 10 in the case of Wong Siu Man, a multiplier of 12 in the case of Wong Siu Ming and a multiplier of 14 in the case of Wong Siu Moon.

13. Mr. Tang for the Plaintiff observed that all Mr. Ip's suggested multipliers appeared to run from the date of hearing and that since dependency dates from the date of death, which in this case was 9th December, 1972, Mr. Ip's calculation should be revised by adding 2 ½ to each multiplier suggested by him. He argued that more conventional method of taking the monthly dependency and then selecting a multiplier should be followed. A multiplier of 10 in this case he thought would not be unreasonable. He referred to Leung Sin Ha v. Chan Pay-wai⁽¹⁾ and to Yeung On v. Leung Chun Ming⁽²⁾.

14. In Leung Sin Ha v. Chan Pay-wai (supra) the Plaintiff a widow claimed damages for the death of her son who was aged 26 at the date of his death. Prior to his death he had been contributing a monthly sum towards the maintenance of the Plaintiff and her 3 infant children. A multiplier of 10 was adopted after taking into account the ages of the Plaintiff and the deceased, the probability that the deceased would some day have married (although there was no evidence that this would have been likely within the foreseeable future) and the vicissitudes of life.

15. In Yeung On v. Lung Chun Ming (supra) the deceased girl was aged 21 years at the date of her death. A multi-plier of 7 was adopted. Huggins J. in the course of his judgment said:

"............ I am of opinion that to take a factor of 7 years in arriving at the compensation for loss of support which the parents might reasonably expect was to take a minimum figure and was, perhaps, slightly ungenerous."

16. There is no doubt that up to the time of his death the deceased paid $433 per month to the Plaintiff as a contribution to the support of the family. I think he would have continued to contribute that amount for some considerable time to come. It must be borne in mind that the children will finish their schooling in due course and take up gainful employment. The father of the deceased however has not worked for years it is unlikely that he will be employed ever again and Plaintiff's ability to earn will probably decrease as she grows older. The purchasing power of money is declining steadily year by year and I think that it is not unreasonable to say that in a few years from now $433 will buy considerably less than it buys today. It should be borne in mind too that the deceased's earnings would probably have increased. I have come to the conclusion that deceased would probably have maintained his contribution at $433 per month at least.

17. The deceased was about 21 years old at the time of his death. There is nothing to indicate that he was contemplating marriage in the foreseeable future. I adopt a multiplier of 10 which I consider to be reasonable. I assess general damages at $51,960 ($433 x 12 x 10). As this will be a lump sum payment it will be discounted by 20% which gives a figure of $41,568.00.

18. Special damages of $1,450 for funeral expenses and $50 for damage to the clothing of the deceased was agreed.

19. Mr. Tang did not pursue the claim under the Law Reform and Miscellaneous Provision Ordinance.

20. The total award for special and general damages therefore is $43,018.00.

21. The General Damages of $41,568.00 are apportioned as follows:

The money apportioned between the five minor children is to be paid direct to the Plaintiff for their benefit. Their maintenance and education must be paid for and the money if invested would produce nothing like enough to meet that cost. The sum of $10,000 apportioned to Wong Ching, father of the deceased is to be paid to him.

22. Interest is awarded to Plaintiff on the special damages of $1,500 at the rate of 4% per annum from the date of the accident until today and at 8% per annum on the general damages of $41,568.00 from 7th December, 1973 the date of service of the writ until today.

23. The Plaintiff shall have the costs of this assessment with certificate for counsel.

Representation:

Mr. Robert Tang instructed by Messrs. H.M. So & Co. for the Plaintiff.

Mr. Simon Ip (Johnson, Stokes & Master) for the Defendant.

(1) 1974 H.K.L.J. Vol. 4 p.210

(2) 1963 H.K.L.R. p. 572