EVER-BRILLIANT CONSTRUCTIONS CO. v. NG FUNG KWAN and Others

EVER-BRILLIANT CONSTRUCTIONS CO. v. NG FUNG KWAN and Others

The appeal is dismissed because the Tribunal acted within its statutory powers: the security order under s.30 was supportable on the record, the Tribunal lawfully heard the case under s.21 in the defendant's absence where no contradictory evidence was presented, the appellant failed to pay ordered security and offered no admissible fresh evidence on appeal under s.35(2), and therefore there was no basis to set aside the Award.

Citation
EVER-BRILLIANT CONSTRUCTIONS CO. v. NG FUNG KWAN and Others
Parties
Claimants/respondents: Ng Fung Kwan and 6 Others; Defendant/appellant: Ever-Brilliant Constructions Co.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 October 1996
Case Number
HCLA64/1996
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal / Hearing and Judgment on Appeal to High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Security for Adjournment Under Section 30, Appeal Limitations and Fresh Evidence Under Section 35, Hearing in Absence Under Section 21, Procedural Fairness and Right to Be Heard
Source Language
EN
Labour Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Security for Adjournment Under Section 30 Appeal Limitations and Fresh Evidence Under Section 35 Hearing in Absence Under Section 21 Procedural Fairness and Right to Be Heard

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ng Fung Kwan and 6 Others

Claimants/respondents

Ever-Brilliant Constructions Co.

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal / Hearing and Judgment on Appeal to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal was ultra vires in ordering security as a pre-condition to defend
  2. 2 Whether adequate inquiries and reasons were made and recorded before ordering security
  3. 3 Whether the hearing on 14 November was irregular for failing to consider the defendant's particulars of defence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Tribunal acted within its statutory powers: the security order under s.30 was supportable on the record, the Tribunal lawfully heard the case under s.21 in the defendant's absence where no contradictory evidence was presented, the appellant failed to pay ordered security and offered no admissible fresh evidence on appeal under s.35(2), and therefore there was no basis to set aside the Award.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Award and order of the Labour Tribunal dated 5 December 1995 upheld
  • Appellant ordered to pay awarded sums and costs as per Tribunal award