CHOW JIH YIM WILSON v. GLOBAL REGENCY ELECTRONICS LTD

CHOW JIH YIM WILSON v. GLOBAL REGENCY ELECTRONICS LTD

The Court held that the correct implied term required the performance bonus to be calculated by reference to the net profits of the company ascertained up to the date of termination of employment (31 March 2003); the Labour Tribunal erred in finding the claimant had not discharged the burden of proof and in holding the bonus should be based on year‑end pro‑ration. Judgment entered for claimant in the sum of $578,065 with interest and costs.

Citation
CHOW JIH YIM WILSON v. GLOBAL REGENCY ELECTRONICS LTD
Parties
Claimant Appellant: CHOW JIH YIM WILSON (formerly CHOW CHI KWONG WILSON); Defendant Respondent: GLOBAL REGENCY ELECTRONICS LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 September 2005
Case Number
HCLA21/2005
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal (hearing 20 Sep 2005; Judgment 22 Sep 2005)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for Claimant
Legal Topics
Performance Bonus, Implied Terms, Ascertainment of Profits, Termination of Employment, Burden of Proof, Tribunal Investigation
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Performance Bonus Implied Terms Ascertainment of Profits Termination of Employment Burden of Proof +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHOW JIH YIM WILSON (formerly CHOW CHI KWONG WILSON)

Claimant Appellant

GLOBAL REGENCY ELECTRONICS LIMITED

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal (hearing 20 Sep 2005; Judgment 22 Sep 2005)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the performance bonus is to be calculated by reference to net profits as at the date of termination of employment (31 March 2003) or by reference to the year-end net profits and pro-rated for months worked
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Tribunal failed in its duty to investigate the claimant's claim and properly assess the accounts and expenses relevant to profit calculation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the correct implied term required the performance bonus to be calculated by reference to the net profits of the company ascertained up to the date of termination of employment (31 March 2003); the Labour Tribunal erred in finding the claimant had not discharged the burden of proof and in holding the bonus should be based on year‑end pro‑ration. Judgment entered for claimant in the sum of $578,065 with interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for Claimant

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Claimant against the Defendant in the sum of $578,065
  • Interest at 2% above Prime from 1 April 2003 to judgment date (22 September 2005) to be paid on the judgment sum