發律師函對追討意外導致的損失重要嗎? Demand Letters issued for SME and why they matter

發律師函對追討意外導致的損失重要嗎?

有一天你不幸發生意外受傷，於是你發律師函索償。不過你有沒有想過這封信會成為呈堂證供，有機會影響日後對簿公堂時所得到的賠償?法官檢視律師函之後發現你假定其中一方為事件的負責人，所以你須為該被告繳付訟費。

這正是Shadid Hussain v Environmental Seal Corporation Ltd & Anor [2007] HKCU 540 一案中發生的事。原告在高爾夫球場工作時不小心滑倒弄傷背部，於是他發律師函給直屬僱主「分包商」（第一被告）及「總包商」（第二被告）。但是，法官認為原告向第二被告發出的律師函中「大膽地假設」第二被告為總包商。證據顯示原定的工程早應在意外十個月前完成。原告理應先釐清第二被告是否仍然是總包商，而不是在律師函中先行假設。原告也沒有在發給第一被告的律師函中釐清總包商的資料，同時也沒有檢查清楚第二被告在商業登記上的新地址，導致第二被告沒有收到律師函。因此，法官判定原告須付第二被告的訟費。

此案的教訓是案件起始時發出的律師函足以用作證據左右你的賠償金額，因此大家需審慎處理，確保資料準確無誤。

Demand Letters issued for SME and why they matter

In the unfortunate event of getting injured in an accident, you ask your lawyer to send demand letters to the parties at fault. They will form evidence of a case if it goes to trial. Then you go to court, but the judge finds out that one of the parties was not involved in the accident, so you have to pay the costs of that innocent party.

This was what happened when the plaintiff did not clarify who to sue in Shadid Hussain v Environmental Seal Corporation Ltd & Anor [2007] HKCU 540. The plaintiff slipped and hit his back while lifting a stone block at a Golf Club in the course of his employment. He sued the first respondent as the sub-contractor and the second respondent as the principal contractor. However, the court found that the plaintiff “boldly assumed” the second respondent as the principle contractor in the demand letter. From the evidence, the construction work was supposed to end 10 months before the accident, but the plaintiff failed to clarify in the demand letter to his direct employer, the first respondent, the particulars of the principal contractor and whether the second respondent was still the contractor of the work. The plaintiff was even more careless in failing to check the second respondent’s new address on the registry which resulted in the second respondent not receiving the letter. Therefore, the plaintiff was liable to costs of the second respondent.

The lesson to learn here is to be prudent in the very beginning stage of the case when you send a demand letter, which will be included as part of the evidence to affect your case. One bad apple spoils the barrel!