The Court of Appeal said yesterday it had been caused 'considerable disquiet' after finding it may have erred in reversing a decision to award an injured worker almost $1 million. Granting Ting Kwok-keung leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, Mr Justice Simon Mayo said there was sufficient evidence to show that the Court of Appeal might have substituted its own view of the evidence presented to the original judge. The personal injuries case first appeared before then-deputy judge David Lok in the District Court. He ordered Tam Dick Yuen Engineering, Progress Construction Ltd and Lau Chun-kong to pay Mr Ting $980,469 in damages for work-related injuries. Mr Ting fell almost four metres at a building site in 1996. He was permanently injured after breaking his right leg. The main issue before Judge Lok was whether Mr Ting was an employee, and eligible for compensation, or a sub-contractor as the company contended. Judge Lok found in Mr Ting's favour, but was overruled by the Court of Appeal, comprising Mr Justice Simon Mayo, Mr Justice Michael Wong Kin-chow and Mr Justice Frank Stock. In appealing against their ruling, John Bleach, SC, told the Court of Appeal it had 'not applied the principles which it had propounded', adding evidence and passages of the judge's analysis had been overlooked and misread by 'this court'. Mr Justice Mayo said: 'We feel bound to say that this case is, on any view, an unusual case, for this court has been persuaded to a position of considerable unease at the course it took.' Mr Justice Mayo also said Mr Bleach's submission 'caused the court considerable disquiet' as it led it to conclude it may have substituted its own view of the evidence.