29 Nov 2018
Leave to appeal was granted because the presence of the IOM report identifying the claimant as a victim of trafficking, combined with the Court of Appeal decision in Z N, raised arguable questions of law sufficient to justify granting permission despite the appeal being based largely on credibility findings.
28 Jun 2011
The Presiding Officer made an error of law by accepting inferred explanations that lacked evidential basis and which were not put to the claimant for cross-examination; reliance on those irrelevant and unsupported factors caused material injustice to the defendant and vitiated the Tribunal's acceptance of the claimant's evidence, warranting setting aside the Award and remitting the matter for retrial before a different Presiding Officer.
20 Aug 2009
The court refused to strike out the conspiracy claims because it was not plain and obvious that the claims were unsustainable: genuine issues of fact remain as to inducement, choice and pecuniary loss and whether plaintiffs were entitled to rely on the visa-approved salaries as the measure of loss; potential inconsistency with criminal findings and prior Tribunal proceedings did not justify summary dismissal and these factual and legal issues must be resolved at trial.
20 Aug 2009
The strike‑out applications were dismissed because the pleaded conspiracy claims were not obviously unsustainable: prior admissions and criminal findings did not make it plain no cause of action remained and the existence and quantum of pecuniary loss arising from the alleged conspiracy are factual matters for trial rather than appropriate for summary dismissal.
20 Aug 2009
The strike out applications were dismissed because the conspiracy-based claims are not obviously unsustainable on the pleaded material; whether the plaintiffs suffered pecuniary loss and the appropriate measure of damages raise triable issues for determination at trial despite admissions made in other proceedings and potential issues of estoppel or abuse of process.
20 Aug 2009
The strike out applications were dismissed because it was not plain and obvious that the plaintiffs' conspiracy claims were unsustainable; factual questions including whether plaintiffs suffered pecuniary loss and the measure of damages, and the effect of their prior admissions, raised issues for trial rather than matters fit for disposal on a strike out application.
20 Aug 2009
The strike out applications were dismissed because the claims are not obviously unsustainable; disputed factual issues—including whether plaintiffs suffered pecuniary loss as a result of the alleged conspiracy and the measure of damages—require trial; prior Criminal and Labour Tribunal events do not preclude civil adjudication on these issues at this stage.
18 Aug 2009
Magistrate's credibility findings were supported by the tape transcript and surrounding evidence so convictions under the Employment Ordinance (failure to pay full wages) are safe; sentencing of 9 months was excessive in context and, giving credit for full repayment of arrears and having regard to sentencing history and legislative intent, appropriate total custodial sentence is 3 months imprisonment concurrent on the 10 summonses.
11 May 1998
The Tribunal properly investigated the matters before it, made explicit findings on credibility after evaluating oral and documentary evidence, and the appellate court will not overturn those credibility-based findings absent error; no such error was shown, so the appeal is dismissed and the Tribunal's decision is upheld.
17 Dec 1997
Leave to appeal granted solely on the issue of wages in lieu of notice because it is arguable the Tribunal failed to consider whether the termination was coerced; leave refused on severance pay because dismissal was for alleged misconduct not redundancy; leave refused on underpayment and statutory holiday claims because they are factual findings supported by evidence and appeals are restricted to questions of law; fresh evidence of perjury cannot be admitted on appeal under s35(2) LTO.