All EC insurers and employers are advised to take note that the
Legislative Council passed a resolution on 30 June 2010 to increase
the amounts of five compensation items payable under the
Employees' Compensation Ordinance Cap. 282 (ECO) by around
Increasing the ceiling of monthly earnings from HK$21,000 to
HK$21,500. This figure is the basis for calculating the maximum
amounts of compensation for permanent total incapacity (Section 9)
and for death under the ECO.
Increasing the minimum levels of compensation for death from
HK$303,000 to HK$310,000.
Increasing the minimum levels of compensation for permanent
total incapacity from HK$344,000 to HK$352,000.
Increasing the maximum amount of compensation for employees
requiring attention by another person from HK$412,000 to
As for the surcharge on late payment of compensation,
increasing the minimum amount of surcharge imposed upon expiry of
the payment period from HK$490 to HK$500 and the minimum of a
further surcharge imposed three months after the expiry of the
payment period from HK$970 to HK$1,000.
To allow time for employers and the insurance industry to
prepare for the implementation arrangements, the revised levels of
compensation shall take effect from 1 August 2010.
At this stage it is not clear whether the amendments will also
apply to accidents which happen before 1 August 2010.
Copyright 2010. Mayer Brown LLP, Mayer Brown
International LLP, Mayer Brown JSM and/or Tauil & Chequer
Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is
associated. All rights reserved.
Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization comprising
legal practices that are separate entities (the Mayer Brown
Practices). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP, a
limited liability partnership established in the United States;
Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership
incorporated in England and Wales; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong
partnership, and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil &
Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer
Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown
logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their
Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal
issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a
comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not
intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific
legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The failure of a party to call a witness does not necessarily give rise to an adverse inference being drawn in accordance with Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298. An unfavourable inference is drawn only if evidence otherwise provides a basis on which that unfavourable inference can be drawn.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).