5 Jul 2024
The High Court refused leave to appeal because the applicant's complaints raised factual disputes the Labour Tribunal reasonably resolved by assessing contemporaneous WhatsApp evidence and witness credibility; no arguable error of law or excess of jurisdiction was shown to justify permission to appeal.
5 Aug 2022
Leave to appeal refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the adjudicator made a legal error or exceeded jurisdiction; the application concerned factual matters (including the consensual settlement) and thus did not satisfy the statutory requirement that an appeal raise solely questions of law.
7 Jan 2021
The Court upheld the Presiding Officer's interpretation that the Annual Commission Clause entitled the appellant to 10% of net profit attributable to his own profit centres; the US$50,000 and US$40,000 payments were interim payments accepted by the appellant and, by the parties' conduct, precluded reliance on the No Oral Modification Clause (waiver/estoppel); the housing allowance was provided in kind and varied by conduct and lapsed on termination; the appellant failed to prove entitlement to the claimed annual leave; accordingly the appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.
3 Jul 2019
Court found defendant proved that plaintiff submitted and obtained reimbursement for expense items not incurred for company business (Octopus top‑ups beyond reasonable limit, taxi fares, entertainment), that no MPF sponsorship oral agreement was established, and that the handbook forfeiture clause was not incorporated; plaintiff established some contractual annual leave entitlement but 15 days (2007) were time‑barred; set‑off resulted in dismissal of plaintiff's claim and judgment for defendant for HK$335,092.92 plus interest and costs.
23 Jun 2016
The Presiding Officer erred in law by failing to consider implied terms, other agreements or the legislative intent behind the 2007 amendments when excluding commissions from deduction under ss35(4), 41(6) and 41C(6); accordingly the appeals are allowed in part and the awards are set aside and remitted to the Labour Tribunal to determine whether commissions and team leader bonus constitute sums paid in respect of paid sick/holiday/annual leave days and thus may be deducted. The Presiding Officer's finding that the employer's Replacement Arrangement was a unilateral imposition was supported by…
30 Oct 2015
Leave to appeal was granted because it was arguable the Presiding Officer erred in law in his treatment of commissions under the Relevant Statutory Provisions and failed to investigate adequately whether the Claimants had accepted or acquiesced to the Replacement Arrangement, such failures meeting the threshold for leave from the Labour Tribunal.
30 Oct 2015
Leave to appeal granted because the appellant demonstrated arguable errors of law on the commission set-off point (interpretation/application of ss35(4),41(6),41C(6)) and an arguable failure by the Presiding Officer to investigate the factual/legal effect of claimants' alleged acceptance of the Replacement Arrangement, such failures could give rise to injustice making an appeal appropriate.
8 Jul 2013
No arguable question of law: the employment commenced on actual performance (12 Jan 2012) so wages not payable for unworked days; the Employment Ordinance permits splitting of annual leave subject to s41AA; the contract defines 'place of origin' as Pangasinan so return passage obligation covers Pangasinan and clause 7(b) fixes a daily travelling and food allowance which covers local bus fares, and clause 7(b) does not extend to departure from Macau as it is not the defined place of origin.
13 Jun 2007
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the contested findings were predominantly findings of primary fact based on the credibility of witnesses and therefore lacked a realistic prospect of success on appeal; the single finding based on inference (annual leave being ad hoc) had no other rational explanation on the facts found.
12 Mar 2007
Judge preferred Defendant's evidence, held the 2nd Employment Contract fixed the remuneration for two years but did not limit the contract duration to two years; the contract continued beyond 31 March 2004 and the Defendant was constructively dismissed on 16 September 2004, entitling her to payment in lieu of notice, contractual gratuity bonus, accrued annual leave pay and statutory sickness allowance; Plaintiff's claims for recovery were dismissed and costs awarded to Defendant.