ALLIDEM MAE G v. KWONG SI LIN

ALLIDEM MAE G v. KWONG SI LIN

Leave to appeal was refused because the Labour Tribunal had found as a fact that the employer failed to prove sufficient grounds for termination under s.9 EO and the Deputy Judge upheld that finding; given those conclusive factual findings there was no factual foundation upon which a question of law of general public importance (including any reconsideration of Chak) could be argued under s.35A(1) LTO, and the court will not hear an academic appeal.

Citation
ALLIDEM MAE G v. KWONG SI LIN
Parties
Claimant (respondent): Allidem Mae G.; Defendant (appellant): Kwong Si Lin
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 March 2006
Case Number
HCMP33/2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From Decision of the Court of First Instance on Appeal From the Labour Tribunal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal (hcmp33/2006)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Long Service Payment, Termination for Misconduct (s.9 Eo), Leave to Appeal, Question of Law of Public Importance, Ex Gratia Payment Vs Payment in Lieu (chak)
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Appellate Procedure Labour Tribunal Procedure Statutory Interpretation Long Service Payment Termination for Misconduct (s.9 Eo) Leave to Appeal Question of Law of Public Importance +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allidem Mae G.

Claimant (respondent)

Kwong Si Lin

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From Decision of the Court of First Instance on Appeal From the Labour Tribunal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal (hcmp33/2006)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal raises a question of law of general public importance under s.35A(1) LTO
  3. 3 Whether the decision in Chak Chong-chi v Maxim's Caterers Ltd applies where employer paid at termination without expressly stating payment was ex gratia

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the Labour Tribunal had found as a fact that the employer failed to prove sufficient grounds for termination under s.9 EO and the Deputy Judge upheld that finding; given those conclusive factual findings there was no factual foundation upon which a question of law of general public importance (including any reconsideration of Chak) could be argued under s.35A(1) LTO, and the court will not hear an academic appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed