LAW KEE ALICE v. KENYE LTD AND ANOTHER

LAW KEE ALICE v. KENYE LTD AND ANOTHER

Leave to appeal refused because the Labour Tribunal reasonably rejected the defendants' factual case (notably Zhang's evidence) which removed any factual foundation for alleging a duty to disclose; even if a disclosure duty were arguable, the claimant was negotiating her own employment and did not occupy an ad hoc fiduciary position obliging her to act solely for the employer or to disclose basic statutory limits; the tribunal fulfilled its s20(3) investigatory duty and no arguable point of law is established for appellate intervention.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 799
Parties
Claimant: 羅琦 (LAW KEE ALICE); 1st Defendant: 金奧國際股份有限公司 (KENYE LTD); 2nd Defendant: 東方電影出品有限公司 (MANDARIN FILMS LIMITED)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 February 2026
Case Number
HCLA16/2025
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal Refused
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; amended Form 14 dismissed
Legal Topics
Long Service Payment, MPF Offset, Statutory Caps, Fiduciary Duty (ad Hoc), Duty to Disclose, Leave to Appeal, Evaluation of Factual Findings, Labour Tribunal Procedure
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Contract Law Equity and Fiduciary Law Civil Procedure Long Service Payment MPF Offset Statutory Caps +5 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 7 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

羅琦 (LAW KEE ALICE)

Claimant

金奧國際股份有限公司 (KENYE LTD)

1st Defendant

東方電影出品有限公司 (MANDARIN FILMS LIMITED)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the supplemental employment letter was valid and binding
  2. 2 Whether the claimant owed a positive duty to disclose relevant employment legislation to the employer
  3. 3 Whether the claimant occupied an ad hoc fiduciary position giving rise to a duty to disclose

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal refused because the Labour Tribunal reasonably rejected the defendants' factual case (notably Zhang's evidence) which removed any factual foundation for alleging a duty to disclose; even if a disclosure duty were arguable, the claimant was negotiating her own employment and did not occupy an ad hoc fiduciary position obliging her to act solely for the employer or to disclose basic statutory limits; the tribunal fulfilled its s20(3) investigatory duty and no arguable point of law is established for appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; amended Form 14 dismissed

Orders

  • Refuse to grant leave to appeal
  • Dismiss the amended Form 14