WINSOME WATCH-CASE MANUFACTORY LTD v. CHAN HAU CHUNG

WINSOME WATCH-CASE MANUFACTORY LTD v. CHAN HAU CHUNG

The Court held the employer's $30/day offer did not negate a lay-off under s31E because it was not a contractual entitlement; and an employee "taken to be laid off" does not automatically cease employment on the relevant date — the employee must elect to treat the employer's conduct as repudiation (for example by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WINSOME WATCH-CASE MANUFACTORY LTD v. CHAN HAU CHUNG
Parties
Applicant/defendant: Winsome Watch-Case Manufactory Limited; Respondent/claimant: Chan Hau Chung
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 1984
Case Number
HCLA40/1983
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Hearing and Judgment in High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Lay Off, Severance Payment, Limitation of Claims, Termination of Employment, Repudiatory Breach, Employment Ordinance Sections 31 E and 31 N
Source Language
en
Employment Law Contract Law Statutory Interpretation Labour/industrial Relations Lay Off Severance Payment Limitation of Claims Termination of Employment +2 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Winsome Watch-Case Manufactory Limited

Applicant/defendant

Chan Hau Chung

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Hearing and Judgment in High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employer's offer of an unearned sum prevents a lay-off under s31E of the Employment Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether an employee "taken to be laid off" under s31E ipso facto ceases to be employed on the relevant date or must elect to treat the employer's conduct as repudiation
  3. 3 Whether the employee's notice/claim under s31N was time-barred

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the employer's $30/day offer did not negate a lay-off under s31E because it was not a contractual entitlement; and an employee "taken to be laid off" does not automatically cease employment on the relevant date — the employee must elect to treat the employer's conduct as repudiation (for example by giving notice under s31N) — accordingly the presiding officer's finding that the claimant's notice of 7 June was effective was correct and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Labour Tribunal decision awarding severance payment to respondent upheld