KWONG WAH v. WOO SIK LING t/a SHUN TAT ENGINEERING CO. AND OTHERS

HCPI 463/95

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

PERSONAL INJURIES ACTION NO. PI 463 OF 1995

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

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

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

R U L I N G

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

1. This is a claim by the Plaintiff claiming damages for personal injuries against the Defendants.

2. The allegation by the Plaintiff being that, on 6th June 1992 he was working in a boat, measuring a hole at the bottom of the ship's hull, and in order to carry that out he had to lift a metal plate weighing some 200 lbs. Because of the limited space in the ship's hull, he was required to take those measurements in an awkward position and thereby injuring his neck and various parts of his spine, his cervical and the lumber vertebras.

3. By way of medical evidence, there are three medical reports prepared by the Plaintiff's doctors and one medical report of Dr O'Donnovan, instructed by the Defendants. In the case of Dr O'Donnovan, his first medical report was in September 1995 and the latest one being in July of this year.

4. The present application is by the Defendants for interrogatories, and these interrogatories sought require the Plaintiff to state whether the Plaintiff had suffered any injuries to his neck, back and his lower back or any parts of his upper limb before 6th June 1992, that is the day of accident, and matters related thereto.

5. From all the medical reports in this matter prepared by the Plaintiff's, as well as the Defendants' doctors, there is almost no indication from those medical reports that the doctors had in any way detected any prior injuries. The closest that those medical reports come to, in so far as injuries prior to 6th June 1992 is concerned, is that in the first report of Dr O'Donnovan reciting the past medical history of the Plaintiff, it states that he had no injuries, operation or illnesses before and none after other than pertaining to this injury. Whereas in Dr O'Donnovan's latest medical report, there is some mention of the left hip having a history relating to deep diving eight years ago and a history of brief loss of consciousness after a head injury 20 years ago.

6. I am told by Mr Wong, who appears for the Defendants, that the purpose of these interrogatories are so that the Defendants would know if there were any injuries suffered by the Plaintiff prior to the accident, so that those records could be obtained in order that the medical experts would be able to properly assess the Plaintiff's resulting disability arising from this accident complained of. Bearing in mind that the injury arising from the accident took place in June 1992 and we are now in November 1998, chances of any medical records still kept by the Hospital Authorities are almost nil.

7. Mr Wong has also, in his submission, argued that the Plaintiff has shown himself to be somewhat lack of bona fide in that his post-accident earnings were not properly disclosed until the Defendants had administered further and better particulars or interrogatories whereby the true situation has now been disclosed by the Plaintiff.

8. I should say that if the present interrogatories were administered with the intention of discrediting the Plaintiff, then that is not a proper purpose for interrogatories. Ultimately, it boils down to this. Even if the interrogatories administered result in the Defendants being aware of any previous injuries suffered by the Plaintiff prior to the accident, it is unlikely that in that event any assistance would be given to the medical experts to differentiate between the injuries suffered as a result of the accident complained of, or whether that injury was from an earlier injury, or whether it arises from degeneration.

9. In so far as the medical reports are concerned, it seems that all doctors are agreed that in so far as this Plaintiff is concerned, now aged 46, in his 20 years of work he had undergone quite substantial degeneration, particularly to his spine, and much of the difficulties in the assessment arises because of this. Moreover, looking at the conduct of this matter, particularly in the last year, the Defendants have seen fit, since January of this year, to administer on no less than three occasions requests for further and better particulars from the Plaintiff, and at least on two occasions requests for interrogatories, all of which have been complied with by the Plaintiff and acceded to despite the fact that, in some of these, the Plaintiff could well have argued that such requests should not have been asked of the Plaintiff. If it be the case that because of the Plaintiff's compliance with these further and better particulars, or with the interrogatories, that the Defendants have taken the view that they are entitled to press on with further interrogatories, then it lends weight to the submission of Mr Wong for the Plaintiff that the present interrogatories asked for is oppressive. Moreover, it lends weight to the submission of Mr Wong, for the Plaintiff, and it certainly gives the appearance that the Defendants are employing this as a form of delaying tactics to delay the trial coming on.

10. For all the reasons given above, I am not convinced that the present interrogatories sought by the Defendants are either necessary for the fair disposal of the matter nor that it is necessary in order to save cost. Accordingly, I will exercise my discretion against ordering such interrogatories. The Defendants' summons is therefore dismissed with costs. There is now left the Plaintiff's application to set down.