PUN, PABITRA v. WONG KAN HING

PUN, PABITRA v. WONG KAN HING

The Employment Ordinance does not prohibit employers from paying employees for services rendered on rest days; s.40A prevents wages in lieu of statutory holidays but does not preclude remuneration for actual work on rest days, and therefore the Presiding Officer erred in disallowing the appellant's claim solely on the basis that there is "no pay for rest days."

Citation
PUN, PABITRA v. WONG KAN HING
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 1997
Case Number
HCLA30/1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Labour Tribunal (employment Matter) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Presiding Officer's finding disallowing the claim for wages for rest days set aside and legal impediment removed.
Legal Topics
Rest Days, Wages for Rest Day Work, Holiday Pay, Contract Interpretation, Employment Ordinance Cap.57
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Statutory Interpretation Rest Days Wages for Rest Day Work Holiday Pay Contract Interpretation Employment Ordinance Cap.57

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Labour Tribunal (employment Matter) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employee is entitled to remuneration for work performed on statutorily required rest days
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Ordinance prohibits payment for work on rest days or only bars wages in lieu of statutory holidays
  3. 3 Whether the Presiding Officer misapplied Fu Hong Choi v. Ho King Restaurant Co. Ltd

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Ordinance does not prohibit employers from paying employees for services rendered on rest days; s.40A prevents wages in lieu of statutory holidays but does not preclude remuneration for actual work on rest days, and therefore the Presiding Officer erred in disallowing the appellant's claim solely on the basis that there is "no pay for rest days."

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Presiding Officer's finding disallowing the claim for wages for rest days set aside and legal impediment removed.

Orders

  • Set aside that part of the Labour Tribunal order disallowing the appellant's claim for wages for rest days
  • Remit the matter to the Labour Tribunal for determination of quantum and factual findings as to payment of rest day wages