CUEVAS, ROWENA CABALLES v. TSE KING HA GRACE

CUEVAS, ROWENA CABALLES v. TSE KING HA GRACE

The Court refused leave because the Board's determinations that the accommodation and other complaints were not sufficiently serious or were matters of credibility were factual findings not questions of law, and additional factual matters could not be admitted on appeal under s32(2)(ii) Cap 453; therefore no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CUEVAS, ROWENA CABALLES v. TSE KING HA GRACE
Parties
Claimant: Rowena Caballes Cuevas; Defendant: Tse King Ha Grace
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 February 2015
Case Number
HCME6/2014
Procedural Posture
Minor Employment Claims Appeal (cap 453) / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Accommodation of Domestic Helper, Leave to Appeal, Admissibility of Fresh Evidence
Source Language
en
Employment Civil Procedure Constructive Dismissal Accommodation of Domestic Helper Leave to Appeal Admissibility of Fresh Evidence

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rowena Caballes Cuevas

Claimant

Tse King Ha Grace

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Minor Employment Claims Appeal (cap 453) / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law in finding there was no constructive dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the complaint about lack of suitable accommodation raised a question of law
  3. 3 Whether the Court may receive or consider fresh evidence on an appeal under s32(2)(ii) Cap 453

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused leave because the Board's determinations that the accommodation and other complaints were not sufficiently serious or were matters of credibility were factual findings not questions of law, and additional factual matters could not be admitted on appeal under s32(2)(ii) Cap 453; therefore no question of law arose to justify leave.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused