Ng Wai Po 訴 黃波記有限公司
Read the full judgment text of DCEC 561/2001 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment before 周兆熊.
Employees' compensation – causal link between work injury and subsequent disability – optic atrophy alleged to result from work accident – medical evidence attributing optic neuropathy to smoking and drinking – finality of Commissioner's Certificate of Compensation Assessment (Form 6) absent appeal – assessment of compensation under sections 7, 9, and 10 of the Employees' Compensation Ordinance – calculation of permanent loss of earning capacity, temporary incapacity, and medical expenses – site foreman with monthly salary of HK$20,020 – corneal abrasion of the right eye from accident on 28 July 1999 – respondent admitted liability – applicant subsequently claimed optic atrophy and 100% visual disability in right eye – multiple medical experts (Lam Sze Wing, Yip Kwok Foo, H.Y. Lai of Prince of Wales Hospital, Dr. Cheung Ming Kuen, Dr. Cheung Sek Hong) unanimously opined that optic atrophy was toxic optic neuropathy caused by heavy smoking and drinking, unrelated to the work injury – court held optic atrophy not compensable as it was not caused by the accident – only the small area of corneal abrasion of the right eye was the injury arising from the accident – whether the 5% permanent loss of earning capacity assessment in Form 6 is final – yes, applicant did not appeal, making it final under Ng Ming Cheong v. Mass Transit Railway Corp. [1997] HKLRD 1231 – whether medical evidence on causation of optic atrophy should be considered – held that all medical reports clearly showed the vision problems were not caused by the accident – compensation calculation under the Ordinance: permanent loss of earning capacity of HK$20,020 × 5% × 72 = HK$72,072; temporary incapacity for 25 days at HK$20,020 ÷ 30 × 25 × 4/5 = HK$13,346.67; medical expenses of HK$176; total compensation of HK$85,594.67 – court ordered respondent to pay HK$85,594.67 within 28 days together with interest at the judgment rate from 28 July 1999 until payment, with interest from 28 July 1999 to 22 June 2005 assessed at half the judgment rate, and from 23 June 2005 onwards at the full judgment rate – costs awarded to the applicant on a taxation basis if not agreed – applicant appeared in person without legal representation – respondent represented by T.M. Lee, counsel, instructed by Deacons (的近律師事務所).
Legal issues: Causal link between optic atrophy/vision loss and work injury · Assessment of compensation under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance
Outcome: Judgment for the applicant; respondent ordered to pay compensation of HK$85,594.67 plus interest, and costs.
Cited by 67 cases
|
DCEC 561/2001 香港特別行政區 區域法院 僱員補償案件2001年第561號 ----------------------
--------------------- 主審法官 ：周兆熊法官 聆訊日期 ：2005年4月18日 判案書頒下日期 ：2005年6月22日 判 案 書 1.申請人的申請，是要求答辯人對他在1999年7月28日在工作期間因意外受傷而作出的僱員賠償。答辯人承認責任，因此本庭需要裁決的只是賠償金額的問題。 2.2001年6月13日，勞工署署長發出表格6（覆檢補償評估証明書），評定答辯人需給予申請人25天病假，而申請人由於受傷而引致永久喪失賺取收入能力是5%。申請人沒有對該評估上訴，因此，根據Ng Ming Cheong v. Mass Transit Railway Corp. [1997] HKLRD 1231 一案的判決，上述的評估是最後的評估。根據威爾斯親王醫院Lam Sze Wing醫生在2000年8月15日的報告，申請人受傷的地方，是“small area of cornea abrasion of the right eye”。 3.答辯人在書面陳辭指出根據醫療証據，勞工署署長在表格6的評估不會是錯誤的估計，答辯人引述各個醫生對申請人的狀況的描述及診斷，以証明5%的喪失賺取收入能力的評估是正確的評估，但勞工署署長的評估已是最終的評估，因此，這方面的陳辭是不需要的。 4.申請人指他雙眼的視力因工傷而受損，但這是因申請人吸煙及飲酒的習慣，而不是由於工傷意外而產生的。以下是有關這方面的醫療報告： 4.1 威爾斯親王醫院的Lam Sze Wing醫生在他的日期為2000年8月15日的報告說：“……..Further history revealed that he is a heavy drinker and smoker. ………4.2 威爾斯親王醫院的Yip Kwok Foo醫生在2001年11月19日的報告說： 5.張明權醫生在他的日期為2000年7月11日的醫生報告說： “Mr. Ng is now suffering from 100% visual disability in his right eye ……. However, this is not related to the injuries that occurred on 28th July 1999 but is most likely caused by toxic neuropathy as a result of his habit of heavy smoking and drinking …..” 6.Dr. CheungSek Hong醫生在他的日期為2002年5月10日的醫生報告說： “3. His poor right vision had nothing to do with the incident on 28 July 1999. It was caused by right optic atropathy……” 7.上述的醫生報告清楚指出申請人弱視的情況不是由意外引致的，因此申請人只能獲得由意外引致的傷害，即 “corneal abrasion of the right eye”的賠償。 8.申請人在意外發生時是51歲，當時他是地盤工目，月薪為20,020元。根據《僱員補償條例》（“條例”）條例條例第7和第9條的規定，對喪失5%永久喪失賺取收入能力，他可獲得72,072元（20,020 x 5% x 72）的賠償。 9.根據條例第10條的規定，對25日的病假，就暫時喪失工作能力，他可獲得13,346.67元（20,020 ÷ 30 x 25 x 4/5）的賠償。 10.根據條例第10條的規定，他可獲得醫療費用的賠償。在這方面他的費用是176元。答辯人須支付他的款額是85,594.67元（72,072元 +13,346.67元+176元）。 11.本席作出下述的命令：—
訟費 12.本庭頒下臨時訟費的命令。答辯人須支付申請人本案的訟費。如與訟雙方未能議定訟費的款額，該款額由法庭評定。如在14天內與訟任何一方不向本庭提出申請，此項臨時訟費的命令作實。
申請人 ： 親自應訟，無律師代表 答辯人 ： 由的近律師事務所轉聘T.M. Lee大律師代表 |