CHU SHUK HAN v. CHAN YUEN KWOK

DCCJ1918/2004

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1918 OF 2004

JUDGMENT

1.  This is a hearing for assessment of damages by the plaintiff against the defendant.  Interlocutory judgment was obtained by the plaintiff against the defendant on 19 May 2005.

2.  The plaintiff was the registered owner of a taxi with registration number KT 6938 (“the plaintiff’s taxi”).  She claims against the defendant, the registered owner and driver of a medium goods vehicle bearing registration number EJ 149 (“EJ 149”) in relation to loss arising from an accident which took place on or about 15 July 2003.

3.  In the assessment, the plaintiff gave evidence.  She stated that after the accident the plaintiff’s vehicle was towed to Harvest Logo Motor Service Centre for repair.  The tow fee of $230 was paid by the plaintiff.  Prior to the repair, Messrs Toplis & Harding (HK) Limited conducted a survey of the plaintiff’s taxi and prepared a survey report, with the survey related to the repair charges.

4.  The plaintiff gave evidence that prior to the accident the plaintiff’s vehicle was hired to one Mr Wong Wing-fai at a daily hire of $730.  She stated that the total period of repair of the vehicle took 20 days.  She suffered a loss of 20 days of hire in the sum of $14,600.

5.  The plaintiff stated that in respect of the repair costs she paid the sum of $15,000, being the motor insurance excess which had to be borne by her.  Her insurer paid the balance of the repair charges of $34,000.20.  The total repair cost, which was found to be a reasonable charge by the surveyor, was the sum of $49,000.20.

6.  The surveyor’s representative, Mr Lee Wing-ho, Sammy, the maker of the survey report,  gave evidence of his experience as a motor surveyor starting from 1991.  His expertise is accepted.  The report is at page 35 to page 51.  The survey report stated that after survey his estimated labour cost is $20,850 and parts at $34,646.40.  He gave a discount of 15 per cent in respect of the new parts, as plaintiff’s taxi is not a new vehicle.  Having discounted the 15 per cent of the cost of the spare parts in the sum of $6,496.20, the repair cost recoverable is $49,000.20.

7.  Mr Lee further stated that the survey fee of $670 was paid by the insurer.  There was also a search fee in the sum of $45.00 related to the certificate of particulars of vehicle.

8.  I find that the plaintiff has established the loss and damages as a result of the accident as claimed in the total sum of $64,545.20.  I therefore give final judgment to the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $64,545.20, together with interest thereon at judgment date from date of writ to date of judgment and thereafter at judgment rate until payment.

9.  I order that the defendant do pay the plaintiff the cost of the assessment to be taxed if not agreed.