法律援助署五十周年紀念特刊 | Legal Aid Department 50th Anniversary Commemorative Publication

P.60 除本地工友外，外地海員亦可受惠於工會和法援署的 服務。 Alongside local seamen, international seafarers also benefited from the help of the Union and LAD. 支援四海 除本地工友外，各地海員亦可受惠於工會和法援署的服務。 丁錦源解釋：「在上世紀八十年代，我開始在工聯會擔任職 務，有機會接觸各行各業的工友。在不少工傷或死亡個案中， 工友的家屬都來自內地或海外，如印尼、菲律賓等地。作為 工會代表，我們當時以受託人身分，代表工友或家屬申請法 律援助。」 提到最具代表性的個案，要數當年工會替菲律賓海員爭取合 理賠償，並上訴至終審法院的經歷。2003年，一名菲律賓船 員在一艘香港註冊的船上工作期間受傷，完全失去右眼視 力。他其後根據香港的《僱員補償條例》，在香港的區域法 院申請索償，而非根據在菲律賓簽訂的僱傭合約內的仲裁條 款，以及當地的補償方案，申索較香港水平為低的賠償。船 隻擁有人的保險代表當時根據仲裁條款，擱置根據香港的 《僱員補償條例》提出的索償程序。由於案件涉及具有重大 而廣泛重要性的法律論點（即區域法院是否擁有專屬司法管 轄權處理所有僱員的索償申請，從而杜絕依據仲裁條款擱置 索償訴訟的申請），因此該案獲准上訴至終審法院。 丁錦源憶述：「法援署認同在香港註冊的船上工作的船員如 申索賠償，香港法院應對案件有司法管轄權。」。終審法院 最後裁定海員勝訴，並裁定除明確指出的情況外，《僱員補 償條例》第18A（1）條賦予區域法院專屬司法管轄權，處理 根據該條例提出的索償；仲裁並非例外情況，亦無權通過仲 裁擱置根據該條例提出的索償。「我們齊心協力，一起爭取， 最終獲勝。」現時本港有超過二千艘註冊船舶，粗略估計至 少有四萬名本地和外地船員，他們不論國籍都受到香港的司 法制度及法援計劃的保障。 Assistance on Land for All at Sea Alongside local seamen, international seafarers also benefited from the help of the Union and LAD. “I took up a position at the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions in the 1980s, and got to know union workers from different industries,” Ting elaborates. “In many work related injury and death cases, the workers’ families were from Mainland China or Southeast Asian countries. As union representatives, we acted on behalf of the workers or their family members to seek legal aid.” Ting recalls one groundbreaking case when the Union helped a Filipino seaman fight for his rightful compensation at the Court of Final Appeal (CFA). After the seaman sustained work injuries in 2003 on a ship registered in Hong Kong causing him total loss of vision in his right eye, he filed a claim in the District Court (DC) of Hong Kong for compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Ordinance (ECO) rather than under an arbitration clause in one of the employment contracts (made in the Philippines) and a scheme of compensation in the Philippines, which provided less favourable compensation than that under the ECO. The insurer of the vessel owner relied on the arbitration agreement to stay the proceedings under ECO in Hong Kong. The case progressed up to the CFA as a point of law of great general or public importance arose, namely whether the DC has exclusive jurisdiction to deal with all employees’ compensation claims to preclude a stay of the proceedings under ECO in favour of arbitration. “LAD agreed that jurisdiction laid with Hong Kong for compensation of seamen working on Hong Kong registered ships,” Ting recalls. The CFA ruled in favour of the seaman, inter alia, that section 18A(1) of ECO conferred exclusive jurisdiction on the DC to deal with all claims under ECO save in the cases expressly excepted. Arbitration is not such an exception and there is no power to stay proceedings under ECO in favour of arbitration. “We worked together and fought hard, and eventually won the case.” Currently, there are more than 2,000 registered ships with a minimum of 40,000 local and foreign seamen in Hong Kong: all of them irrespective of their nationalities are protected by the city’s legal system and legal aid scheme. 法援服務、關愛惠民 Legal Aid for the People