XU DAZHONG v. NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI t/a NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI HONG KONG BRANCH

XU DAZHONG v. NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI t/a NIPPON KAIJI KYOKAI HONG KONG BRANCH

The Tribunal's finding that the Subject Payments included EOY Payments was set aside because the Presiding Officer failed to give adequate reasons for that conclusion, relied improperly on the Defendant's witness without reconciling inconsistent earlier statements, and thus the question of the nature of the Subject Payments must be remitted to the Tribunal for retrial to be determined objectively in accordance with established principles of contractual interpretation and evidence.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2588
Parties
Claimant (appellant): Xu Dazhong; Defendant (respondent): Nippon Kaiji Kyokai t/a Nippon Kaiji Kyokai Hong Kong Branch
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 October 2019
Case Number
HCLA15/2018
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Appeal (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Order relating to EOY Payments set aside and claim remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial; costs order nisi in favor of Claimant in sum $600.
Legal Topics
Bonus Entitlement, End of Year Payments, Contract Variation by Handbook, Evidence and Findings of Fact, Remittal for Retrial, Costs
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Bonus Entitlement End of Year Payments Contract Variation by Handbook Evidence and Findings of Fact Remittal for Retrial +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Xu Dazhong

Claimant (appellant)

Nippon Kaiji Kyokai t/a Nippon Kaiji Kyokai Hong Kong Branch

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Appeal (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Subject Payments described as "bonus" were purely discretionary bonuses or comprised both discretionary bonuses and contractual EOY Payments
  2. 2 Whether the Presiding Officer gave adequate reasons for finding that the Subject Payments included EOY Payments
  3. 3 Whether inconsistency in the Defendant's pleadings/statements undermines the Tribunal finding and requires appellate intervention

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's finding that the Subject Payments included EOY Payments was set aside because the Presiding Officer failed to give adequate reasons for that conclusion, relied improperly on the Defendant's witness without reconciling inconsistent earlier statements, and thus the question of the nature of the Subject Payments must be remitted to the Tribunal for retrial to be determined objectively in accordance with established principles of contractual interpretation and evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Order relating to EOY Payments set aside and claim remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial; costs order nisi in favor of Claimant in sum $600.

Orders

  • Set aside the Labour Tribunal order insofar as it related to the claim for EOY Payments
  • Remit the EOY Payments claim to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before the same presiding officer if available or another presiding officer