Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Arrears of wages

Legal area

Court

18 Dec 2017

LY GIA NIEN v. The Personal Representative of SIR JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, the Deceased

Citation

LY GIA NIEN v. The Personal Representative of SIR JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, the Deceased
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3748/2013

The court accepted the plaintiff’s unchallenged evidence and awarded judgment for the plaintiff in the total sum of HK$749,368.38 comprising arrears of wages, wages in lieu of notice, severance payment, annual leave pay and end of year pay; interest on arrears was awarded under Employment Ordinance s.25 and interest on other items at 2% p.a. from transfer date to judgment and thereafter at judgment rate; costs awarded to plaintiff nisi to be taxed.
15 Dec 2017

LET’ SPA CO LTD v. CHAN KA YEE

Citation

LET’ SPA CO LTD v. CHAN KA YEE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA22/2017

The court refused leave to appeal because the presiding officer's findings were supported by evidence, no substantial injustice from any alleged investigative failure was demonstrated, the challenged contract clauses were properly characterized as penal and unenforceable, and the issues raised did not disclose an error of law under s32(1) LTO.
15 Dec 2017

LIU HUANHUAN v. LET’ SPA CO LTD AND ANOTHER

Citation

LIU HUANHUAN v. LET’ SPA CO LTD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA24/2017

Leave to appeal was refused because the Presiding Officer's factual findings and legal conclusions were supported by the evidence and legal principle: admissions and witness evidence (and absence of documentary proof of payment) justified the awards; the contractual clauses were correctly characterised as penal and unenforceable because they did not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss; no substantial injustice or legal error was demonstrated to warrant leave under s32(1) LTO.
13 Jul 2015

林子富對湘廚人家有限公司

Citation

林子富對湘廚人家有限公司
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA16/2015

Leave to appeal was refused because the High Court found no error of law or procedural unfairness in the Labour Tribunal's exercise of discretion to conduct the hearing in English with translation and to order a security deposit; the Tribunal's preliminary view that the applicant's case was weak and the deposit order was just and equitable was supported by the hearing record and the applicant failed to show a basis for granting appeal permission.
30 Dec 2011

DAHIYA RAVINDER SINGH v. ANGEL GARMENT LTD

Citation

DAHIYA RAVINDER SINGH v. ANGEL GARMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA25/2011

The factual findings established the claimant was an independent consultant paid commission with advance payments forming part of that commission, the consultancy was terminated in September 2008, the claimant had been paid in excess of any commission entitlement, and there was no arguable point of law; accordingly the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and the Labour Tribunal had no jurisdiction over the tort claim absent an employment contract.
8 Dec 2003

LEE THAI LAI v. WONG CHUNG KAI t/a KAI HING TRADING CO AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEE THAI LAI v. WONG CHUNG KAI t/a KAI HING TRADING CO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA64/2003

The appeal was allowed because the Tribunal's reasons did not establish any lawful basis to pierce the corporate veil or to find an agency relationship that would justify joint and several liability; accordingly the judgment against both Defendants was set aside and the claim remitted for re-trial.
3 Jan 2001

CHAN KWOK WAH AND OTHERS v. INTERACT CONTRACTING CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation

CHAN KWOK WAH AND OTHERS v. INTERACT CONTRACTING CO. LTD. AND OTHERS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA87/2000

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicants failed to demonstrate a prima facie legal error or that the Presiding Officer's factual findings and proportional deductions (30% and 40%) were perverse or outside his discretion; the Presiding Officer had adequately investigated, tested credibility and compared records, and his conclusions did not justify appellate interference.
29 Oct 1999

WONG SHAM AND OTHERS v. CHIU KUNG HUI AND ANOTHER

Citation

WONG SHAM AND OTHERS v. CHIU KUNG HUI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1418/1996

Applying the multi-factor test the court found the claimant was an employee (control by defendant, integration into defendant's organization, provision of equipment and materials, tax treatment and lack of business risk/profit), and that the defendant had constructively dismissed the claimant by failing to pay; accordingly the claimant was entitled to arrears and severance/long service payment with interest.
29 Jan 1999

WU MAN KWONG v. ASIA CULTURE BROADCAST CO. LTD.

Citation

WU MAN KWONG v. ASIA CULTURE BROADCAST CO. LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA1/1998

The court held that the respondent had effectively affirmed the appellant's employment on varied terms (suspension of production duties with a 1/3 salary reduction), employment continued until the appellant treated it as terminated on 28 February 1997, the appellant was entitled to arrears of salary for the periods identified because readiness and willingness to work sufficed as consideration and the respondent failed to prove effective termination (the 9 December letter was not shown to have been served). Accordingly the appeal was allowed for arrears of salary of HKD 47,236.56 and costs of…
18 Jul 1997

CHOI WAI WAH and Another v. SCANDINAVIA ARTS LTD.

Citation

CHOI WAI WAH and Another v. SCANDINAVIA ARTS LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA140/1996

The High Court upheld the Labour Tribunal's factual findings and credibility assessments, finding the 13 June letter was consistent with dismissal and there was no error of law in the Presiding Officer's decision; the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.