TAWAGON PATRICIA JULIAN v. LEUNG MAN CHING

TAWAGON PATRICIA JULIAN v. LEUNG MAN CHING

Leave to appeal was refused because the Tribunal's factual finding that there was no physical assault was supported by the evidence, constructive dismissal therefore was not established, no error of law was identified, and the applicant's grounds were unparticularised or untenable.

Citation
TAWAGON PATRICIA JULIAN v. LEUNG MAN CHING
Parties
Claimant (appellant): TAWAGON PATRICIA JULIAN; Defendant (respondent): LEUNG MAN CHING
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 February 2000
Case Number
HCLA101/1999
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal) / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal (refused)
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Wages in Lieu of Notice, Evidence, Hearsay, Standard of Proof, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
EN
Labour Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Constructive Dismissal Wages in Lieu of Notice Evidence Hearsay Standard of Proof +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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TAWAGON PATRICIA JULIAN

Claimant (appellant)

LEUNG MAN CHING

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal) / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the presiding officer failed to investigate under section 20(3) of the Labour Tribunal Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the applicant proved constructive dismissal arising from alleged assault
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal applied the criminal standard of proof to the civil claim

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the Tribunal's factual finding that there was no physical assault was supported by the evidence, constructive dismissal therefore was not established, no error of law was identified, and the applicant's grounds were unparticularised or untenable.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused