YAPE LIEZEL SUELTO v. LEE ALICE YU YING

YAPE LIEZEL SUELTO v. LEE ALICE YU YING

The Presiding Officer applied an incorrect evidential approach by seeking independent corroboration rather than weighing the competing factual accounts on the balance of probabilities and failing to make findings whether the Defendant's evidence was accepted; that error of law warranted allowing the appeal, setting aside the award and remitting the matter for retrial before another presiding officer.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4736
Parties
Respondent (claimant): Yape Liezel Suelto; Appellant (defendant): Lee Alice Yu Ying
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 October 2025
Case Number
HCLA7/2023
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; award set aside and matter remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before another presiding officer; costs order nisi made in favour of the Defendant with time to apply to vary.
Legal Topics
Summary Dismissal, Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof, Remittal for Retrial, Employment Ordinance S.9, Judicial Bias
Source Language
EN
Employment Law Labour Law Civil Procedure Summary Dismissal Burden of Proof Standard of Proof Remittal for Retrial Employment Ordinance S.9 +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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yape Liezel Suelto

Respondent (claimant)

Lee Alice Yu Ying

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant justified summary dismissal under section 9 of the Employment Ordinance or common law
  2. 2 Whether the Presiding Officer applied the correct standard and manner of assessment of evidence (balance of probabilities)
  3. 3 Whether the Presiding Officer failed to make adequate findings of fact and weigh competing versions of events

Ratio Decidendi

The Presiding Officer applied an incorrect evidential approach by seeking independent corroboration rather than weighing the competing factual accounts on the balance of probabilities and failing to make findings whether the Defendant's evidence was accepted; that error of law warranted allowing the appeal, setting aside the award and remitting the matter for retrial before another presiding officer.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; award set aside and matter remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before another presiding officer; costs order nisi made in favour of the Defendant with time to apply to vary.

Orders

  • The award dated 16 February 2023 is set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before another presiding officer.