LISURYANI v. FUNG MEI WA SHIRLEY

LISURYANI v. FUNG MEI WA SHIRLEY

Leave to appeal was granted because it was arguable that clause 2(C) (commencement on grant of immigration permission on 4 July 2012) applied and the Presiding Officer failed to consider or give reasons for rejecting that clause, thereby raising an arguable error in law under section 32 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance.

Citation
LISURYANI v. FUNG MEI WA SHIRLEY
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Lisuryani; Defendant/respondent (employer): Fung Mei Wa Shirley
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 February 2013
Case Number
HCLA28/2012
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal (court of First Instance) / Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 32 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal allowed; leave to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Termination Before Commencement, Leave to Appeal, Contract Interpretation, Credibility of Witnesses, Jurisdiction of Labour Tribunal
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Administrative Law Contract Law Termination Before Commencement Leave to Appeal Contract Interpretation Credibility of Witnesses +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisuryani

Claimant/appellant

Fung Mei Wa Shirley

Defendant/respondent (employer)

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal (court of First Instance) / Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 32 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Presiding Officer erred in law by finding the employment was terminated before its commencement
  2. 2 Whether clause 2(A) or clause 2(C) of the standard employment contract governs commencement of the contract
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant was granted permission to remain/work on 4 July 2012 and that that date constitutes commencement

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because it was arguable that clause 2(C) (commencement on grant of immigration permission on 4 July 2012) applied and the Presiding Officer failed to consider or give reasons for rejecting that clause, thereby raising an arguable error in law under section 32 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal allowed; leave to appeal granted

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal allowed under section 32 of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance; leave to appeal granted to the Court of First Instance