CHUNG FUNG CHU v. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

DCEC251/2004

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

 EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION CASE NO. 251 OF 2004

______________________

BETWEEN

	Chung Fung-Chu	Applicant
	and
	Secretary for Justice	Respondent

 ______________________

 

Coram : Deputy District Judge W C Li in Chambers

Date of Hearing : 15 March 2007 at 10.01 am

Date of Delivery of Decision : 15 March 2007

 

______________________

D E C I S I O N

______________________

 

1.  The Applicant was examined by Dr Chu, the Respondent’s expert, on 9 May 2005, and the date of the medical report was on 30 May 2006.

2.  The Applicant asked for disclosure and discovery of this medical report by Dr Chu.  She also asked for the disclosure of a medical report by Dr Chapman Chan.

3.  The Respondent contested this application for the discovery of these two doctors’ reports on the ground that these were privileged documents.  They relied entirely on Order 24/5/13 to say these were privileged and they declined to disclose.

4.  I agreed with the Respondent’s argument that Dr Chan’s report was privileged.  Dr Chan did not examine the plaintiff.  Dr Chan merely gave his expert opinion to the Respondent in contemplation of this litigation.  Dr Chan studied the office environment and gave advice to the Respondent. This appeared to fit into Order 24/5/13.  I accepted that this was privileged.

5.  As to Dr Chu’s report, he examined the claimant.  I took the view that the Claimant was entitled to see the medical report in which she had been examined by the Respondent’s doctor.

6.  I did not agree with the Respondent’s view that Order 24/5/13 would apply in this case and that the report by Dr Chu was privileged.

7.  No case authority was submitted, although solicitor for the Respondent referred to the cases mentioned in the White Book under Order 24/5/13.  The only argument was under Order 24/5/13.  I did not agree with the Respondent’s argument that Dr Chu’s medical report was privileged.

8.  I therefore made an order in term of paragraph 1 of the Claimant’s Summons for discovery, that the Respondent were to disclose and provide a copy of Dr Chu Yat-chor’s medical report to the Claimant within 21 days of the date hereof.

(Submissions re costs)

9.  Costs of today’s hearing be costs in the cause.

 

 

W C Li Deputy District Judge

 

Representation:

Applicant in Person

Miss K Wong of Messrs Liu, Chan & Lam, for the Respondent

 

Appeal by the respondent to Court of Appeal allowed. Please refer to CACV123/2007 dated 30 October 2007