XN000022-1986-07-09 — Page 49

46

WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1986

HE SAID IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE SUBJECT WAS CURRENTLY BEING EXAMINED BY A SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION AND THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD BRING TO THE SUB-COMMITTEE'S ATTENTION THE GROUP'S OBSERVATION.

ANOTHER MEMBER, DR THE HON HENRIETTA IP, ALSO ENDORSED THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE LAW AMENDMENT AND REFORM (CONSOLIDATION) ORDINANCE (LARCO) AND THE FATAL ACCIDENTS ORDINANCE (FAO) BE COMBINED INTO ONE.

COMMENTING ON SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE AMENDING BILL TO LARCO, DR IP SAID ONE OF THEM WAS TO REMOVE INCIDENTS OF +DOUBLE RECOVERY+.

SHE EXPLAINED THAT THE LARCO DEALT WITH THE AWARD OF DAMAGES FOR INJURIES AND IN SOME CASES DEATH AND THE FAO DEALT WITH THE AWARD OF DAMAGES FOR FATAL INJURIES.

+WHEN A PERSON IS INJURED THROUGH THE TORTIOUS ACTS OF ANOTHER, HIS DEPENDANTS' ARE ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR LOSS OF HIS SUPPORT.

+IN THE CASE OF A FATAL ACCIDENT, ANY PECUNIARY BENEFIT WHICH ACCRUES TO A DEPENDANT OF A DECEASED IN CONSEQUENCE OF HIS DEATH MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN DAMAGES ARE AWARDED TO HIS DEPENDANT UNDER FAO, SHE SAID.

IN PRINCIPLE THIS AWARD MERGED WITH THE AWARD FOR LOST YEARS UNDER LARCO BUT, IF THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE DEPENDANT, FOR EXAMPLE, A WIFE AND CHILD, THE WIFE MIGHT INHERIT THE WHOLE OF THE LARCO AWARD, AND THE SON WOULD BE ENTITLED IN HIS OWN RIGHT TO DAMAGES UNDER THE FAO, WHICH MEANT THAT THE DEFENDANT MUST PAY THE FULL LARCO AWARD PLUS A FURTHER AMOUNT UNDER THE FAO,

+TO ELIMINATE THE INCIDENTS OF 'DOUBLE RECOVERY', CLAUSE 2 OF THIS BILL PROVIDES THAT THE CALCULATION OF AN AWARD UNDER LARCO SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ANY LOSS OR GAIN TO THE DECEASED'S ESTATE CONSEQUENT TO HIS DEATH (EXCEPT FOR FUNERAL EXPENSES) AND DAMAGE FOR LOSS OF ABILITY TO RENDER SERVICE AFTER HIS DEATH.

+ THE DAMAGES UNDER LARCO IS ALSO SUBJECTED TO ANY DEDUCTION THE COURT FINDS JUSTIFIED IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES,+ DR IP EXPLAINED.

ON THE OTHER HAND, SHE SAID, WHERE THE VICTIM SUFFERED NON-FATAL INJURIES AND THEIR EXTENT AND EFFECT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN FULLY ASSESSED BY THE TIME JUDGEMENT WAS GIVEN IN HIS FAVOUR, THE DAMAGES AWARDED MIGHT NOT FULLY REFLECT THE DEGREE OF DISABILITY HE WOULD SUFFER SOME YEARS LATER.

/AS A