在涉及疏忽的民事索償中，原告人即傷者一方有責任證明照顧開支是合理 (Reasonable) 的。
如傷者為兒童，而傷勢相對嚴重，出院後依然需要專人後續持續照顧，家長因此聘用工人姐姐 (家庭傭工) 專門照顧康復中的子女，如法庭認為合理，相關開支可以索償。
如有在僱傭合約中，特別列明需要照顧受傷及正在康復的子女，但無需處理其他家務，此合約將來亦可作聘用工人姐姐的合理性的證據。
如工人姐姐同時照顧正康復的子女，同時處理家務（或其他與意外受傷的護理無關的工作），法庭可就相關開支有所扣減。
例如，在Chiu Chung San v Park Sung Jin (DCPI 1124/2022)一案中，傷者右眼視力嚴重受損，法庭考慮了傷勢以及醫療證據後，不允許傷者索償聘用全職家庭傭工的開支，但允許傷者聘用兼職家務助理的開支，為期一年，相關開支總額為$30,000。
法庭的理由是，雖然右眼視力受損會為傷者帶來嚴重不便，但未有充分證據證明傷者不能照顧自己日常生活所需，而且法庭亦考慮到傷者進行眼部手術後視力應該會逐漸恢復。判詞如下：
”81. It is understandable that P, with his severely impaired right eye vision, would be greatly inconvenienced in most, if not all, of his daily living activities. There is however, other than his subjective complaints, no medical or expert evidence in support of the claim that he cannot cope with daily living activities or that he is dependent on others for assistance. Expert in ophthalmology Dr Cheung assesses P to have normal (or near-normal) ability to perform activities of daily living though with lost reserve capacity.
82. I consider that on the evidence, a claim for full-time domestic help is not made out. Also, P’s right eye vision would be expected to improve after the eye operation, after which he should become independent in his daily living.
83. I consider it reasonable to make a provision for part-time domestic help of say once or twice a week for groceries shopping and household cleaning chores, at say $2,000 a month for about a year. I make a lump sum award of $30,000.“
至於法庭在本案中是否對傷者過於嚴苛，以及傷者方是否可以準備更多專家證據證明自己視力受損而難以自理，則是另外的議題了。
陳柏豪律師為香港執業律師，是CPH Legal的主任律師，專門處理意外及災難事故引起的人身傷亡索償，工傷賠償案件，刑事抗辯及商業訴訟案件。 私人執業的同時，陳律師亦由香港政府律政司委任為外聘檢控官。
HK 
EN