Compensation for lung disease: understanding pneumoconiosis and mesothelioma benefits (lcq21)
Following is a question by the Hon Kwok Wai-keung and a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, in the Legislative Council today (April 24):
Question:
The Pneumoconiosis and Mesothelioma (Compensation) Ordinance (Cap. 360) seeks to establish a scheme for compensating persons or their family members in respect of incapacity or death resulting from pneumoconiosis or mesothelioma (or both) and to formulate plans for purposes connected therewith. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the number of patients suffering from pneumoconiosis or mesothelioma who received "compensation for care and attention" under Cap. 360 in each of the past five years, and the amounts involved;
(2) as it is learnt that only 18 patients are currently receiving the compensation mentioned in (1), which represents a significant deviation from the number of persons who are genuinely in need of such compensation, and many patients suffering from pneumoconiosis or mesothelioma and their caregivers have relayed that the patients fail to attend a medical assessment because they are in extremely poor physical condition and even need to be totally bedridden, resulting in the failure of the Pneumoconiosis Medical Board to conduct medical assessments, whether the Government knows the relevant situation; if so, whether it has recommendations for improvement, including but not limited to arranging for outreach medical practitioners to conduct an on-site medical assessment for such patients, relaxing the eligibility criteria for receiving such compensation, and increasing compensation items in order to provide compensation for the caregivers of such patients;
(3) as under Cap. 360, patients may claim reimbursement of outpatient medical expenses at a maximum daily rate of $300, and the maximum daily rate of reimbursable medical expenses for their inpatient and outpatient treatment received on the same day is $370, some patient groups have pointed out that such compensation limits were last adjusted by the Government in early 2018, and the relevant compensation limits can no longer reflect patients' actual medical expenses, whether the Government will raise the compensation limits concerned to compensate patients for their medical expenses; and
(4) as some patient groups have pointed out that Cap. 360 does not allow patients to make claims for reimbursement of medical expenses on medical consultations sought on the Mainland, but many patients have travelled between the Mainland and Hong Kong seeking medical consultations in recent years, whether the Government will allow patients suffering from pneumoconiosis or mesothelioma to make claims to the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Fund Board for reimbursement of medical expenses on medical consultations sought for such diseases on the Mainland?
Reply:
President,
The Pneumoconiosis and Mesothelioma (Compensation) Ordinance (PMCO) provides compensation for persons who are determined by the Pneumoconiosis Medical Board (PMB) as suffering from pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma, resulting in incapacity or death and their family members. The compensation includes compensation for incapacity; compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenities; medical expenses; and compensation for care and attention.
In consultation with the Department of Health, my reply to the Member's question is as follows:
(1) The number of pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons receivingcompensation for care and attention, and the amount of such compensation paid according to PMCO in the past five years are provided below:
Year |
Number of persons |
Amount of compensation |
2019 |
12 |
$672,750 |
2020 |
16 |
$1,050,148 |
2021 |
17 |
$984,907 |
2022 |
17 |
$867,823 |
2023 |
15 |
$830,100* |
*The figure is subject to final auditing.
(2) In accordance with PMCO, pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons may request PMB to conduct medical examinations on them to determine the degree of incapacity and eligibility for compensation for care and attention, etc. Pursuant to PMCO, these persons may also request further medical examinations by PMB to determine whether the results of the last examinations have changed. PMB is an independent statutory board established under PMCO, with members comprising an Occupational Health Consultant or a Senior Occupational Health Officer or an Occupational Health Officer and two registered medical practitioners appointed by the Director of Health. Based on the results of medical examinations of pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons, including the results of suitable tests and clinical examinations as well as other relevant information, PMB will, according to its professional medical judgement, determine whether these persons have met the eligibility criteria stipulated under PMCO for payment of compensation for care and attention. Besides, when the medical conditions of pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons are stable, non-emergency ambulance transfer service could be arranged, if necessary, for such persons to travel to and from specified places to undergo medical examinations.
Following the established mechanism, the Government adjusts the levels of compensation (including compensation for care and attention) once every two years. The Government has commenced a new round of review, and plans to consult the Labour Advisory Board on the results and recommendations of the review in the fourth quarter of this year and then report to the Legislative Council Panel on Manpower.
(3) PMCO provides that pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons are entitled to the medical expenses in respect of medical treatment as is reasonably necessary in connection with the diseases concerned, subject to the maximum daily rates. According to the established mechanism, the maximum rates are linked to public healthcare service fees and charges. Based on the prevailing public healthcare service fees and charges, the maximum daily rate reimbursable under PMCO for in-patient or out-patient treatment is $300, while that for in-patient and out-patient treatment received on the same day is $370. Under the existing mechanism, the maximum daily rates of medical expenses prescribed by PMCO should be able to cover the necessary expenses on consultation, treatment, medicines, hospitalisation, etc. in public hospitals or clinics incurred by pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons.
(4) According to PMCO, if pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons receive medical treatment outside Hong Kong, and such medical treatment is given lawfully in accordance with the laws of that place and Hong Kong by a medical practitioner or Chinese medicine practitioner registered in Hong Kong, the medical expenses on medical treatment in relation to the above diseases are payable to the pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons.
The Government will review the levels of compensation and coverage of protection under PMCO in a timely manner to ensure that PMCO suits the needs and circumstances of pneumoconiosis and/or mesothelioma persons.
Source: AI-generated images
Empowering innovation: a recap of sj's inspiring speech at the 26th icca congress
Following is the speech by the Secretary for Justice, Mr Paul Lam, SC, at the 26th ICCA Congress Opening Ceremony today (May 5):
Dr Alexandrov (President of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA), Dr Stanimir Alexandrov), Justin (Co-Chair of the ICCA 2024 Hong Kong Host Committee Mr Justin D'Agostino), Neil (Co-Chair of the ICCA 2024 Hong Kong Host Committee Mr Neil Kaplan), Rimsky (Co-Chairperson of Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Mr Rimsky Yuen, SC), David (Co-Chairperson of HKIAC Mr David Rivkin), Joanne (Secretary-General of HKIAC, Ms Joanne Lau), distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
Let me begin by expressing my gratitude to ICCA for agreeing to host the Congress in Hong Kong, which is a very strong vote of confidence in Hong Kong as an international arbitration centre. I must also congratulate the HKIAC on its successful organisation of the Congress. The Department of Justice is indeed very pleased to be one of the supporting organisations by providing financial and other supports.
I can now understand why the ICCA Congress is hailed as the Olympics of the international arbitration community. The Olympics is renowned for the great diversity and high standard of the participants. This ICCA Congress has attracted over 1 300 leading experts in international arbitrations from more than 70 jurisdictions. This is a new record, which I believe will be extremely difficult to break.
With so many friends from other parts of the world and the Mainland, as the Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong, I feel duty bound to seize the opportunity to impress on you that Hong Kong is and will remain to be a leading international arbitration centre. I am going to recast the four letters "ICCA" as an acronym to illustrate the unique strengths and qualities possessed by Hong Kong that make it stand out as one of the best venues for international commercial arbitration.
"I" - Institutional support
"I" stands for "institutional support". Hong Kong is home to many world-class and internationally renowned arbitral institutions. As our home-grown dispute resolution institution, HKIAC has always been ranked as one of the most-preferred arbitral institutions in the world. It is very encouraging to see that HKIAC received a total of 281 arbitration filings in 2023. I think Joanne mentioned some other relevant figures. They continued to be predominantly international arbitration featuring parties from 45 jurisdictions. The total amount in dispute in all arbitration cases was HK$92.8 billion, which is equivalent to about US$12.5 billion, representing a record high for HKIAC.
Among sponsors of the ICCA Congress are other reputable arbitral institutions with offices based in Hong Kong, such as the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), and the South China International Arbitration Center (Hong Kong) (SCIA(HK)).
"C" - Comprehensive legal framework
The first "C" stands for our "comprehensive legal framework" in arbitration. The Arbitration Ordinance in Hong Kong forms the backbone of our arbitration framework. Coming into effect in 2011, the Ordinance is largely based on the Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, which is familiar to practitioners from both civil law and common law jurisdictions, as well as the international business community.
Taking note of arbitration users' needs for flexible funding options, we have refined our arbitration law to specifically provide for third party funding of arbitration in February 2019. In addition, the Outcome Related Fee Structures for Arbitration (ORFSA) was fully implemented in Hong Kong in December 2022. As at March 2024, based on statistics provided by our arbitral institutions, 88 arbitration cases were disclosed to be conducted with third party funding and five cases were conducted with ORFSA.
As to enforcement, arbitral awards made in Hong Kong are enforceable in Hong Kong, and over 170 contracting parties to the New York Convention. But more importantly, Hong Kong enjoys a unique strength that is not shared by other jurisdictions. Under the principle of "one country, two systems", Hong Kong has entered into three mutual legal assistance arrangements with the Mainland on not only mutual enforcement of arbitral awards, but also mutual assistance in interim measures which allow parties to arbitral proceedings administered by the designated arbitral institutions to apply to the Mainland courts for interim measures for preservation of asset, evidence and conduct, before an arbitral award is made. As at March 2024, Hong Kong's arbitral institutions had processed 118 applications for interim measures made to the Mainland courts, and court orders in respect of over RMB16.3 billion worth of assets had been issued.
"C" - Court's pro-arbitration approach
The second "C" stands for "the Court's pro-arbitration approach". The Hong Kong judiciary has long been adopting a very pro-arbitration approach. And such an approach is confirmed by a number of recent court judgments.
Last year, a landmark judgment C v D was handed down by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal. The judgment recognised the distinction between admissibility and jurisdiction, and held that there is a presumption that the issue of non-compliance with a precondition to arbitration is a question of admissibility to be decided by the arbitral tribunal, thereby limiting the scope of court intervention in the arbitral process. In a more recent case of CNG v G, the Court of First Instance reaffirmed the fundamental principles that arbitration is a voluntary and consensual process of final dispute resolution; and it was stressed that the Court must not only respect the autonomy of the tribunal, but also leave the tribunal free to decide the dispute with the proper exercise of its case-management powers, when the tribunal is clearly in the best position to manage its own proceedings and procedure. Lastly, in two very recent judgments handed down around two weeks ago, Re Simplicity & Vogue Retailing (HK) Co Ltd, and Re Shandong Chenming Paper Holdings Ltd, the Hong Kong Court of Appeal noted and ruled that, save in wholly exceptional circumstances, the court should decline to entertain a petition for winding up or bankruptcy when there is an arbitration agreement concerning the debt in question.
"A" - Accessibility to the international legal community
Lastly, the letter "A". Letter "A" stands for the accessibility to the international legal community. I wish to emphasise that the international arbitrations in Hong Kong are accessible to the international legal community. There is no doubt that Hong Kong itself has a very strong tool of legal talents specialised in international arbitrations. This is demonstrated by the large number of sponsors and organisers of not just official events but side events, many of which are leading law firms and barristers' chambers in Hong Kong.
But the point that I really wish to make is that Hong Kong welcomes friends from the Mainland and other parts of the world to take part in international arbitrations conducted here. As an example, to enhance immigration convenience, last year, the Government has expanded the Pilot Scheme on Facilitation for Persons Participating in Arbitral Proceedings in Hong Kong for all visitors to participate in arbitral proceedings here as arbitrators, expert and factual witnesses, counsel in the arbitration, and parties to the arbitration, without the need to obtain any employment visa. From March 2023 to March 2024, 96 persons were allowed to participate in Hong Kong arbitral proceedings without the need to obtain any employment visa under the scheme.
I truly and firmly believe that Hong Kong's reputation as a leading international arbitration centre is well deserved. However, to enable Hong Kong to maintain and enhance such a status, we need your trust and support, in particular, those of you from overseas. Seeing is believing. I hope that, apart from taking part in the official and side events of this ICCA Congress, you will have the chance to experience the Hong Kong life including our delicious food, unique culture and beautiful scenery. I am sure you will be convinced that Hong Kong remains to be a very open, friendly and diversified international society with a solid foundation based on the rule of law.
On this note, I wish to say thank you again, and I wish you all a pleasant evening in celebrating the commencement of the ICCA Congress, and of course, a very fruitful, constructive and pleasant stay in Hong Kong. Thank you very much.
Speech by SJ at 26th ICCA Congress Opening Ceremony Source: HKSAR Government Press Releases
