VERMEERBERGEN PETER ALFRED v. SWISSTRIBE LTD

VERMEERBERGEN PETER ALFRED v. SWISSTRIBE LTD

Leave to appeal was granted in part because the claimant established an arguable point of law that the Presiding Officer may have failed to discharge his statutory duty to investigate material missing invoices and documents and to give sufficient reasons regarding the commission award quantum; the intended challenge...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
VERMEERBERGEN PETER ALFRED v. SWISSTRIBE LTD
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Vermeerbergen Peter Alfred; Defendant/respondent: Swisstribe Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 March 2016
Case Number
HCLA36/2015
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal (hcla 36/2015; on Appeal From Labour Tribunal Claim LBTC 1570 of 2014) / Application for Leave to Appeal (decision on Leave Application; Interlocutory)
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted in part: leave granted on the grounds specified in paragraphs 1-3 of the Amended Grounds of Appeal and refused as to paragraph 4.
Legal Topics
Commission Disputes, Wages in Lieu of Notice, Leave to Appeal, Duty to Investigate, Discovery, Reasons for Decision
Source Language
en
Labour Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Commission Disputes Wages in Lieu of Notice Leave to Appeal Duty to Investigate Discovery +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vermeerbergen Peter Alfred

Claimant/applicant

Swisstribe Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal (hcla 36/2015; on Appeal From Labour Tribunal Claim LBTC 1570 of 2014) / Application for Leave to Appeal (decision on Leave Application; Interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Presiding Officer failed to discharge statutory duty to investigate missing/incomplete invoices and sales records relevant to commission quantum
  2. 2 Whether the Presiding Officer gave adequate reasons for rejecting the claimant's wider commission claim
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was entitled to wages in lieu of notice or was properly dismissed for abandonment

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted in part because the claimant established an arguable point of law that the Presiding Officer may have failed to discharge his statutory duty to investigate material missing invoices and documents and to give sufficient reasons regarding the commission award quantum; the intended challenge to the dismissal of the wages in lieu claim was not made out and leave was refused on that ground. Costs were reserved by making a costs order nisi apportioning the Leave Application costs.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted in part: leave granted on the grounds specified in paragraphs 1-3 of the Amended Grounds of Appeal and refused as to paragraph 4.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted on the grounds specified in paragraphs 1-3 of the Amended Grounds of Appeal (but not paragraph 4)
  • Costs order nisi: 75% of the costs of the Leave Application to be costs in the cause of the appeal; no order as to costs for the remaining 25% of the costs of the Leave Application