CHONG CHENG LIN COURTNEY v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

CHONG CHENG LIN COURTNEY v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD

Because the Labour Tribunal made no finding that the retirement-travel term was not intended to survive termination or that the employer evinced an intention in 1993 to deny that entitlement, it was arguable on the Tribunal's own findings that the first breach of that term occurred in January 1999 when the employer denied entitlement; therefore the Tribunal erred in holding the claim time-barred from 1993 and the appeal succeeds, warranting remittal for retrial before another presiding officer.

Citation
CHONG CHENG LIN COURTNEY v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Chong Cheng Lin Courtney; Defendant/respondent: Cathay Pacific Airways Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 May 2005
Case Number
HCLA52/2004
Procedural Posture
Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Labour Tribunal orders of 12 February 2003 and 22 March 2003 set aside; claim remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before another presiding officer; costs awarded to Claimant.
Legal Topics
Wrongful Repudiation, Accrual of Cause of Action, Post Termination Benefits, Retirement Travel Concession, Limitation Period, Remittal for Retrial, Costs
Source Language
EN
Labour Law Employment Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Limitation Law Wrongful Repudiation Accrual of Cause of Action Post Termination Benefits +4 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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chong Cheng Lin Courtney

Claimant/appellant

Cathay Pacific Airways Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Tribunal Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Judgment on Appeal (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant's claim for retirement travel benefits was time-barred
  2. 2 Whether the employer's 1993 termination was a wrongful repudiation and whether that repudiation also denied post-termination benefits
  3. 3 Whether the contractual term governing retirement travel benefits was intended to survive termination

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Labour Tribunal made no finding that the retirement-travel term was not intended to survive termination or that the employer evinced an intention in 1993 to deny that entitlement, it was arguable on the Tribunal's own findings that the first breach of that term occurred in January 1999 when the employer denied entitlement; therefore the Tribunal erred in holding the claim time-barred from 1993 and the appeal succeeds, warranting remittal for retrial before another presiding officer.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Labour Tribunal orders of 12 February 2003 and 22 March 2003 set aside; claim remitted to the Labour Tribunal for retrial before another presiding officer; costs awarded to Claimant.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Orders dated 12 February 2003 and 22 March 2003 set aside