CHEUNG CHI LEUNG v. YAU WAH PLASTIC MOULD FACTORY

CHEUNG CHI LEUNG v. YAU WAH PLASTIC MOULD FACTORY

The appeal is allowed and the matter remitted for retrial because material factual issues relevant to redundancy and constructive dismissal (ownership of the China factory and the nature of the respondent's post-return work) were unresolved; the appellate court will not decide those facts.

Citation
CHEUNG CHI LEUNG v. YAU WAH PLASTIC MOULD FACTORY
Parties
Respondent/claimant: CHEUNG Chi-leung; Applicant/defendant: Yau Wah Plastic Mould Factory
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 January 1996
Case Number
HCLA149/1995
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Judgment Remitting Case for Retrial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted to presiding officer for retrial on unresolved factual issues; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Redundancy Payment, Constructive Dismissal, Ownership of Employer, Remittal for Retrial, Questions of Law Vs Fact
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Appeal Procedural Law Redundancy Payment Constructive Dismissal Ownership of Employer Remittal for Retrial +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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHEUNG Chi-leung

Respondent/claimant

Yau Wah Plastic Mould Factory

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Judgment Remitting Case for Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the factory in China belonged to the appellant (ownership)
  2. 2 Whether the kind of work required of the respondent had been reduced
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was dismissed by reason of redundancy or left voluntarily/changed terms

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed and the matter remitted for retrial because material factual issues relevant to redundancy and constructive dismissal (ownership of the China factory and the nature of the respondent's post-return work) were unresolved; the appellate court will not decide those facts.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted to presiding officer for retrial on unresolved factual issues; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Case remitted to the presiding officer for retrial on unresolved factual issues including ownership of the China factory, the nature of the respondent's work after return, and whether dismissal or redundancy occurred.