Mark Terence Wong

The appellant sued the respondent for business losses allegedly caused when the respondent damaged a telephone cable, interrupting the appellant's phone service.

The trial judge dismissed the claim, entirely rejecting the evidence of the appellant's owner on credibility grounds.

On appeal, the appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence to explain document discrepancies and argued the trial judge's interventions during testimony rendered the trial unfair.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while some of the trial judge's questioning was improper, it did not compromise the overall fairness of the trial, and the fresh evidence would not have altered the trial judge's strong adverse credibility findings.

The plaintiff claimed over $80,000 in business losses, alleging the defendant severed its telephone lines while filling a trench with concrete in a shared commercial building.

The court completely rejected the evidence of the plaintiff's owner due to numerous inconsistencies, suspect documentation, and a demonstrated pattern of guessing.

The court found no evidence that the plaintiff's telephone lines ran under the defendant's unit or that the defendant caused the disruption.

The action was dismissed.