Read the full judgment text of HCPI 443/2010 on BabelCite. This Court of First Instance judgment was delivered on 25 April 2014 before Bharwaney J.
Personal injuries – fatal accident in public car park – contribution claim by defendant driver against Commissioner for Transport and parking management contractor – defendant struck out interlocutory judgment entered for damages to be assessed after careless driving conviction – whether Commissioner liable as occupier under Occupiers Liability Ordinance Cap 314 – whether parking sign post positioning created foreseeable risk to lawful visitors – whether Hong Kong Parking Limited was occupier or liable in negligence – apportionment of liability – medium goods vehicle driver making tight right-hand turn in narrow circulation aisle struck parking sign post with offside rear side guard – sign post toppled onto deceased who was feeding parking meter – court held Commissioner was occupier of the parking space (not the circulation aisle) and deceased was lawful visitor by express invitation of the parking sign and/or under s 3(6) OLO as user of premises open to the public – reasonably foreseeable that medium goods vehicle could strike sign post and endanger lawful visitors – Commissioner in breach of common duty of care – HKPL claims failed in limine because contractual management/maintenance powers insufficient to confer occupier status and no duty in tort in respect of record-keeping or notification of damage was established – no causal link between any HKPL breach and the accident – apportionment under s 3(1) Civil Liability (Contribution) Ordinance Cap 377: defendant 80% liable for failing to look at right rear mirror and ignoring visible hazard; Commissioner 20% liable for positioning sign post at foreseeable risk location – judgment for defendant against Commissioner for 20% of damages and interest – HKPL claims dismissed – costs orders nisi as set out.
Legal issues: Occupier status of the Commissioner under the Occupiers Liability Ordinance · Breach of common duty of care by the Commissioner as occupier · Whether HKPL is an occupier of the parking spaces · Whether HKPL is liable in negligence · Apportionment of liability between the defendant and the Commissioner
Outcome: Judgment entered for the defendant against the 1st Third Party (Commissioner for Transport) for 20% of the damages and interest awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant. Defendant's claims against the 2nd Third Party (Hong Kong Parking Limited) dismissed. Apportionment: defendant 80% liable, Commissioner 20% liable.
Cited by 6 cases