How do documentation gaps affect a worker's compensation claim?
A District Court in Hong Kong recently dealt with a compensation claim stemming from injuries a worker sustained during a foot steam treatment at a traditional Chinese medicine shop.
The worker initiated legal proceedings seeking damages after a foot steam treatment in October 2018 resulted in scalding injuries. He sought compensation totaling HKD 990,000, arguing that complications from the injuries, combined with his pre-existing diabetes, prevented him from returning to work.
The case highlighted key questions about employment documentation and medical evidence in compensation claims, particularly for workers claiming self-employed status.
The worker commenced proceedings in October 2021, claiming damages under multiple grounds, including negligence and breach of duty of care.
The Court noted that the worker alleged he was previously a self-employed construction site supervisor earning approximately HKD 30,000 monthly.
According to the court decision, the worker stated he managed various construction projects and prepared tenders for work in mainland China and Hong Kong. He described his role as involving subcontracting engineering projects and conducting regular site inspections.
When examining these claims, the Court found no documentation from the Inland Revenue Department or the Mandatory Provident Fund to verify the worker's employment status or income.
The judgment stated: "There is no dispute that there is no contemporaneous evidence from independent institutions such as those issued by the Inland Revenue Department or the Mandatory Provident Fund to verify the [worker's] alleged pre-accident employment status either as an employee or self-employed."
Medical records presented to the Court showed the worker had been diagnosed with diabetes since 2012. The orthopaedic expert appointed by the Court noted in his report:
"The poorly controlled diabetes and the defaulted follow-ups since 2012 also led to the complications including DM neuropathy with poor sensation of both feet. Diabetic neuropathy is nerve damage that is caused by diabetes leading to numbness, tingling, cramps and weakness."
The worker received treatment at North District Hospital for extended periods, including stays from 3 to 9 November 2018 and from 7 December 2018 to 17 February 2019.
The psychiatrist who examined the worker diagnosed him with adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood attributable to the accident.
The Court considered how the pre-existing diabetes affected the claim, noting: "Taking into account the expert's view that DM neuropathy is pre-existing, there is a strong possibility that similar foot problem would have developed in 6 to 7 years. I find 80% of the [worker's] condition attributable to the accident."
In its assessment, the Court closely reviewed the absence of employment documentation. The judgment stated: "If [the worker] was working as a contractor in the construction industry, it is most unlikely that there could be no tracing record at all. Other than contracting fees, there would certainly be evidence, whether in electronic or document form, in relation to the different work sites that [the worker] had been involved with."
The Court ultimately awarded HKD 190,000 in total damages, significantly less than the claimed amount. This included compensation for pain and suffering, special damages, and future medical expenses.
The Court explained its reasoning: "All in all, on the balance of probabilities, I am not satisfied that [the worker] is a credible and honest witness in the aspect of his pre-accident occupation and earnings."
The judgment emphasized that claims for lost earnings require proper documentation to support both employment status and income levels.
