李玉鳳 對 添福餐飲食品發展有限公司

李玉鳳 對 添福餐飲食品發展有限公司

The Court held that the Employment Ordinance s6(1) applies and that where a contract is non-continuous and silent on notice a reasonable notice period is required; the length of reasonable notice is a question of fact to be determined having regard to the nature of the contract, industry practice and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 412
Parties
Applicant: LEE YUK FUNG (李玉鳳); Respondent: TIMFOLD CATERING AND FOOD SERVICE LIMITED (添福餐飲食品發展有限公司)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 February 2021
Case Number
HCME1/2020
Procedural Posture
Employment — Small Wage Claim Arbitration Appeal / Appeal to Court of First Instance (leave Granted)
Outcome
appeal allowed; matter remitted to another arbitration officer for rehearing; costs awarded to appellant
Legal Topics
Termination of Fixed Term Employment, Reasonable Notice, Remittal for Rehearing, Employment Ordinance Interpretation
Source Language
ch
Employment Law Contract Law Statutory Interpretation Termination of Fixed Term Employment Reasonable Notice Remittal for Rehearing Employment Ordinance Interpretation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LEE YUK FUNG (李玉鳳)

Applicant

TIMFOLD CATERING AND FOOD SERVICE LIMITED (添福餐飲食品發展有限公司)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment — Small Wage Claim Arbitration Appeal / Appeal to Court of First Instance (leave Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employer may terminate a fixed-term employment contract by giving reasonable notice when the contract specifies a term but is silent on a notice period
  2. 2 What constitutes 'reasonable notice' and whether same-day morning notice before the start time (less than two hours) is reasonable in the circumstances of this case

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Employment Ordinance s6(1) applies and that where a contract is non-continuous and silent on notice a reasonable notice period is required; the length of reasonable notice is a question of fact to be determined having regard to the nature of the contract, industry practice and the circumstances. The arbitration failed to make necessary factual findings on whether the respondent was entitled to summary dismissal and whether the notice given was reasonable, therefore the claim must be remitted for rehearing by another adjudicator.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; matter remitted to another arbitration officer for rehearing; costs awarded to appellant

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Claim remitted to another arbitrator for rehearing