CHAN PAK SANG AND OTHERS v. KIN YEN LUNG TRADING CO. LTD.

CHAN PAK SANG AND OTHERS v. KIN YEN LUNG TRADING CO. LTD.

The High Court held there was no miscarriage of the Presiding Officer's discretion in imposing the condition to pay sums into court when setting aside an ex parte award given the appellant's failure to notify its change of address, the delay, and the legitimate need to protect the claimants; the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
CHAN PAK SANG AND OTHERS v. KIN YEN LUNG TRADING CO. LTD.
Parties
Claimant: CHAN PAN SANG; Claimant: LAI SHIU HING; Claimant: MA CHAK TIM; Claimant: CHAN CHAU; Claimant: MA HIN CHUN; Claimant: CHAN FU; Claimant: TSUI WAH; Claimant: CHAN KAN SANG; Claimant: CHAN LAU; Claimant: TO CHOON; Claimant: CHUNG KWAN; Defendant/appellant: KIN YEN LUNG TRADING CO. LTD.
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 February 1988
Case Number
HCLA42/1987
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Award, Exercise of Judicial Discretion, Service of Process and Change of Address, Security for Claimants, Agency/identity of Employer
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Civil Procedure Labour Tribunal Practice Setting Aside Default Award Exercise of Judicial Discretion Service of Process and Change of Address Security for Claimants Agency/identity of Employer

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

Parties

CHAN PAN SANG

Claimant

LAI SHIU HING

Claimant

MA CHAK TIM

Claimant

CHAN CHAU

Claimant

MA HIN CHUN

Claimant

CHAN FU

Claimant

TSUI WAH

Claimant

CHAN KAN SANG

Claimant

CHAN LAU

Claimant

TO CHOON

Claimant

CHUNG KWAN

Claimant

KIN YEN LUNG TRADING CO. LTD.

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Presiding Officer misused his discretion by imposing a condition when setting aside an ex parte award
  2. 2 Whether the merits of the defendant's defence had to be fully considered before imposing conditions
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's failure to notify change of address and delay justified imposition of payment into court as condition

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held there was no miscarriage of the Presiding Officer's discretion in imposing the condition to pay sums into court when setting aside an ex parte award given the appellant's failure to notify its change of address, the delay, and the legitimate need to protect the claimants; the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of the Presiding Officer of the Labour Tribunal dated 26 June 1987 upheld
  • Condition imposing payment into court of the sums awarded (HK$118,074) and costs (HK$1,650) as required by the Tribunal remains in force