TEAM CONCEPTS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SHER WAI LING and Others

TEAM CONCEPTS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SHER WAI LING and Others

The Presiding Officer legitimately found as a fact that the new recruits were not true replacements, relied on unexplained delay and lower salary for the PCB draftsman post, and the appellant failed to rebut the s.31Q presumption; the overtime evidence did not prove absence of redundancy and did not require appellate interference, therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TEAM CONCEPTS INTERNATIONAL LTD v. SHER WAI LING and Others
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Team Concepts International Ltd; 1st Respondent (claimant): Sher Wai Ling; 2nd Respondent (claimant): Law Shui Shan; 3rd Respondent (claimant): Lai Kam Yee
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 February 1996
Case Number
HCLA72/1995
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal (labour Tribunal Appeal No. 72 of 1995) / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Labour Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Redundancy, Severance Pay, Constructive Dismissal, Burden of Proof, Presumption of Redundancy, Evidential Burden, Duty to Investigate
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Administrative Procedure Redundancy Severance Pay Constructive Dismissal Burden of Proof Presumption of Redundancy +2 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Team Concepts International Ltd

Appellant (defendant)

Sher Wai Ling

1st Respondent (claimant)

Law Shui Shan

2nd Respondent (claimant)

Lai Kam Yee

3rd Respondent (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal (labour Tribunal Appeal No. 72 of 1995) / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Labour Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissals were by reason of redundancy under s.31Q Employment Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the employer discharged the burden to rebut the statutory presumption of redundancy
  3. 3 Whether the Presiding Officer adequately investigated evidence relevant to redundancy (advertisements, replacements, overtime)

Ratio Decidendi

The Presiding Officer legitimately found as a fact that the new recruits were not true replacements, relied on unexplained delay and lower salary for the PCB draftsman post, and the appellant failed to rebut the s.31Q presumption; the overtime evidence did not prove absence of redundancy and did not require appellate interference, therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Original Labour Tribunal awards of severance payments totalling 43517 HKD to the three respondents upheld