CUSTOM PRODUCTS LTD v. CHAN KIN MAN AND ANOTHER

DCCJ 497/2018

[2019] HKDC 1262

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CIVIL ACTION NO 497 OF 2018

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

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

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

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

1.  This is an assessment of damages arising out of a traffic accident. The plaintiff was represented by Mr Jonathan Lau of Messrs Leung & Lau, Solicitors LLP at the assessment hearing. The 1^st and 2^nd defendants, who failed to file any documents in the assessment proceedings, were not represented and appeared in person at the hearing.

Background

2.  On 13 March 2015 at or around 13:23, the plaintiff’s private vehicle bearing registration number PF4648 was hit by the 1^st defendant’s light goods vehicle driven by the 2^nd defendant on Pok Fu Lam Road.

3.  As a result, the plaintiff suffered loss and damage.  The aforesaid accident was caused by the negligence of the 2^nd defendant being an employee or permitted driver of the 1^st defendant for whom the 1^st defendant was vicariously liable.

4.  The plaintiff commenced the present proceedings against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants on 2 February 2018.  By the service of the writ of summons, the plaintiff sought damages against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants. 

5.  The 1^st defendant had failed to give notice of intention to defend whilst the 2^nd defendant’s defence was struck out by an order dated 27 December 2018.  Final and interlocutory judgments were entered against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants on 16 April 2018 and 27 December 2018 respectively.  The 1^st and 2^nd defendants were adjudged to pay the plaintiff damages to be assessed and costs.

6.  Pursuant to the order made by Registrar Ho on 9 April 2019, if the defendants fail to file and serve any witness statement by 4 June 2019, they shall be deemed to have elected not to adduce evidence on quantum from factual witnesses.  The defendants have filed no witness statement and therefore have led no evidence in this assessment hearing.

7.  Both of the defendants have made no submission with regard to the quantum claimed during the assessment hearing.

The plaintiff’s case

8.  The plaintiff adduced in evidence a motor survey report from Roger Houghton Motor Surveys Limited (“Roger Houghton”) dated 24 March 2015 (“Motor Survey Report”).

9.  The Motor Survey Report estimated the cost of repair at over HK$250,000, exceeding the vehicle’s sum insured and pre-accident current market value which was estimated at HK$150,000 to HK$170,000.  It is of the opinion that the plaintiff’s vehicle has been damaged beyond economic repair and therefore recommended settlement on a total loss basis.  It estimated the scrap value was HK$8,000.

10.  Roger Houghton received 4 garages offers. Kee Yip Motor Engineering has placed the highest offer at HK$45,000 which was accepted by the insurer AXA Insurance Hong Kong Limited (“AXA Insurance”).  After deducting the handling and towing charges of HK$3,000, AXA Insurance received a salvage value at HK$42,000.

11.  Ms Liu Tak Yee, senior claims services specialist of AXA Insurance, gave evidence at the assessment hearing.  She relied on her witness statement dated 4 June 2019 as her evidence-in-chief.  She confirmed that after the accident, the plaintiff had to hire vehicle for the company’s tasks.  The rental fee from 25 March 2015 to 8 April 2015 was at HK$5,760.  The plaintiff also incurred HK$750 for the surveyor fee, HK$45 for the search fee and HK$800 for the towing charges after the accident.  The total amount claimed is at HK$128,355.

Decision

12.  I accept the evidence given in the Motor Survey Report and the evidence of Ms Liu that is supported by relevant documents produced by the plaintiff, and undisputed by the defendants.

Conclusion

13.  For the above reasons, I assess the damages in the sum of HK$128,355 and award this sum to the plaintiff.  As to interest, the plaintiff is entitled to interest on the award at 1% above the best lending rate of HSBC from the date of writ to the date of judgment, and thereafter at judgment rate until payment in full.

14.  I make a costs order that the plaintiff do have costs of the action and the costs of the assessment, to be taxed if not agreed.