MA CHI HUNG v. BACCARAT FAR EAST LTD

MA CHI HUNG v. BACCARAT FAR EAST LTD

The email exchanges did not constitute a binding variation of the written employment contract because no acceptance occurred; the employer's Email 3 constituted a final package proposal that could not be severed by the employee; the Presiding Officer's factual findings (including credibility and that discussions...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
MA CHI HUNG v. BACCARAT FAR EAST LTD
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Ma Chi Hung; Defendant/respondent: Baccarat Far East Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 May 2016
Case Number
HCLA7/2016
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal (section 32(1) Lto)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Variation of Employment Contract, Formation of Contract (offer and Acceptance), Severability of Contractual Terms, Labour Tribunal Jurisdiction and Review
Source Language
en
Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Appeals/review Variation of Employment Contract Formation of Contract (offer and Acceptance) Severability of Contractual Terms Labour Tribunal Jurisdiction and Review

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

Parties

Ma Chi Hung

Claimant/appellant

Baccarat Far East Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to Court of First Instance / Application for Leave to Appeal (section 32(1) Lto)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exchange of emails constituted a binding variation of the written employment contract
  2. 2 Whether the proposed terms were severable so that parts could be accepted independently
  3. 3 Whether established contractual formation principles apply to variations of an existing contract

Ratio Decidendi

The email exchanges did not constitute a binding variation of the written employment contract because no acceptance occurred; the employer's Email 3 constituted a final package proposal that could not be severed by the employee; the Presiding Officer's factual findings (including credibility and that discussions were deferred pending management changes) were not shown to be erroneous in law or outside jurisdiction; consequently the application for leave to appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • No order as to costs