LAU CHI KIN v. CHI SHING HONG FUEL OIL CO. LTD.

LAU CHI KIN v. CHI SHING HONG FUEL OIL CO. LTD.

The Presiding Officer erred in treating all relevant facts as not in issue and in disposing of the claim summarily; the 1/9/93 document was evidence of an oral agreement but not conclusive of its full terms, and there were triable issues (existence and terms of the oral condition precedent and whether the Respondent was prevented from performing) that require oral evidence; appeal allowed and matter remitted for a new hearing.

Citation
LAU CHI KIN v. CHI SHING HONG FUEL OIL CO. LTD.
Parties
Claimant/respondent: LAU CHI KIN; Defendant/appellant: CHI SHING HONG FUEL OIL COMPANY LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 June 1994
Case Number
HCLA6/1994
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court / Judgment on Appeal; Remitted to Labour Tribunal for Rehearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Labour Tribunal set aside except for the part relating to pro‑rata double pay; claims for one month’s wages in lieu of notice and arrears of wages remitted to the Labour Tribunal for a new hearing by another Presiding Officer; costs ordered nisi to be costs in the Appellant's cause in...
Legal Topics
Employment Contract Variation, Oral Agreement Vs Written Document, Condition Precedent (turnover), Summary Disposal / Summary Judgment, Non Est Factum
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Employment Contract Variation Oral Agreement Vs Written Document Condition Precedent (turnover) Summary Disposal / Summary Judgment Non Est Factum

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 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAU CHI KIN

Claimant/respondent

CHI SHING HONG FUEL OIL COMPANY LIMITED

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court / Judgment on Appeal; Remitted to Labour Tribunal for Rehearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1/9/93 document constituted the entire contract or merely evidence of an oral agreement
  2. 2 Whether a condition precedent (monthly turnover of $500,000) formed part of the parties' agreement
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Tribunal Presiding Officer was entitled to dispose of the claim summarily

Ratio Decidendi

The Presiding Officer erred in treating all relevant facts as not in issue and in disposing of the claim summarily; the 1/9/93 document was evidence of an oral agreement but not conclusive of its full terms, and there were triable issues (existence and terms of the oral condition precedent and whether the Respondent was prevented from performing) that require oral evidence; appeal allowed and matter remitted for a new hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Labour Tribunal set aside except for the part relating to pro‑rata double pay; claims for one month’s wages in lieu of notice and arrears of wages remitted to the Labour Tribunal for a new hearing by another Presiding Officer; costs ordered nisi to be costs in the Appellant's cause in...

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Set aside Labour Tribunal judgment of 3 January 1994 except the ruling on pro‑rata double pay.