Cheng Lai Kwan v Nan Fung Textiles Ltd

Cited as:[1999] 1 HKLRD 469;(1997-1998) 1 HKCFAR 204
Court:Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:FAMV13/1998
Judgment Date:01 Sep 1998
FAMV000013/1998 CHENG LAI KWAN v. NAN FUNG TEXTILES LTD

FAMV000013/1998

FAMV No. 13 of 1998

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 13 OF 1998 (CIVIL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM CACV No. 7 OF 1998)

_____________________

Between:

CHENG LAI KWAN

Applicant

AND

NAN FUNG TEXTILES LIMITED

Respondent

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Ching PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ

Date of Hearing: 1 September 1998

Date of Determination: 1 September 1998

___________________________

D E T E R M I N A T I O N

___________________________

Mr Justice Bokhary PJ:

1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant had been injured in an accident at the factory where she worked. She sued her employer. On 9 December 1997 Yam J found her employer liable and awarded her $127,000 damages (arrived at after deducting a sum earlier paid to her by way of employee's compensation) plus interest and costs. Complaining that the award of damages was too low, she appealed to the Court of Appeal asking for a much larger award running to millions of dollars. On 28 April 1998 the Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. She then sought the Court of Appeal's leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. On 10 July 1998 the Court of Appeal refused such leave. And now she is before this Committee asking us to grant her such leave.

2. We turn now to the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484 ("the Ordinance").

3. Section 22(1)(a) of the Ordinance provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal in any civil cause or matter

"as of right, from any final judgment of the Court of Appeal, where the matter in dispute on the appeal amounts to or is of the value of $1,000,000 or more, or where the appeal involves, directly or indirectly, some claim or question to or respecting property or some civil right amounting to or of the value of $1,000,000 or more".

4. The award running to millions of dollars asked for by the applicant is one of unliquidated damages. In those circumstances the Court of Appeal was of the view that s.22(1)(a) of the Ordinance did not avail her. In taking that view, the Court of Appeal relied on the decision...

To continue reading

Request your trial