02/06/2026
接受《南華早報》採訪，講解宏福苑業主，即使接受政府收購受火災影響的物業，依然無損其向疏忽方展開民事索償的權利。
單純以物業價值損失的民事索償而言，業主首先很可能需依賴調查委員會或法庭就疏忽責任誰屬進行事實裁斷 (factual findings)，之後的重點是業主需要量化 (quantify) 損失，而業主本身有舉證責任 (burden of proof)，證明損失。
業主然後該向疏忽方的保險公司展開民事索償 (civil claim，屬於訴訟性質)，以及向大廈本身的結構保險公司，還有自己購買的家居保險公司等提交申索 (claim，屬於保單的合約性質)。
量化損失方面，一般而言需要本身是測量師 (或其他合適的專業人士) 的專家證人 (expert witness) 撰寫專家報告，講述相關物業在火災意外前市值多少，及單位內的財物價值多少。
而物業意外前價值，如高過目前政府的收購價，相關差額再加上未售出前業主需另覓地方租住等開支，則為業主的損失。
法理而言，如有人（或政府）出高於意外前的物業價值 (及其他合理開支) 進行收購，理論上業主則沒有蒙受經濟損失，而不能展開民事索償。
由此可見，即使已出售物業，不影響業主進行民事索償的權益。
// Most experts agreed that selling a flat would not affect the owner’s legal rights to pursue claims, but they had to prove that the fire was caused by the negligence of responsible parties.
Lawyer Eric Chan Pak-ho, who runs his own firm CPH Legal, also said the committee’s findings could be used as evidence in the residents’ civil action and third-party insurance claims.
“Their rights are the same regardless of whether they have sold their flats. As long as they have suffered a loss because of wrongdoing by certain parties, they are entitled to the same remedies in terms of compensation,” he said. //
#香港律師 #宏福苑 #民事索償 #疏忽
