Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Employment relationship

Legal area

Court

24 Apr 2026

何偉玲對香港音樂教育有限公司

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2333
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA6/2026

Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error or jurisdictional flaw in the Tribunal's factual finding that the claimant was an employee; the Tribunal's assessment of evidence (regular monthly payments, MPF contributions, IR56B reporting and the employer's termination notice) provided a rational evidential basis for its conclusion and this court lacks power to overturn such factual findings under s35(2).
26 Sept 2025

WONG WAI HUNG v. EASTFORM INDUSTRIES LTD

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4529
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA17/2022

The Presiding Officer committed errors of law by failing to consider sufficiently and to test binding admissions in the Defendant's filed statement, by failing adequately to investigate material issues (including the effect of those admissions and the timing and nature of alleged payments) and by making perverse findings as to the source of bank deposits without evidential basis; accordingly the appeal is allowed, the decision below is set aside to the extent specified and the matter is remitted to the Labour Tribunal for rehearing before a different presiding officer.
12 Aug 2025

FAN LIAN v. WONG KA KEUNG

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1336
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC710/2022

On the balance of probabilities the applicant was a daily paid casual worker under the control and supervision of respondent at the time of the accident; contemporaneous diary entries, corroborating witnesses and respondent's own actions (payments, supervision, engagement of other contractors, absence of a deposit or written contract for a lump sum contractor) demonstrated an employment relationship; therefore respondent is liable under section 5 ECO and compensation is assessed as computed by the court.
23 Jul 2025

LAM KAM HOI v. CHONG KONG LAU trading as 將軍澳環保廢料回收站

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1200
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1987/2020

On an overall evaluative assessment of the factual indicia (control, payment, instructions, use and function of the truck, close connections between respondent and Hang Hau and contemporaneous evidence) respondent was the employer on the balance of probabilities; contemporaneous medical records rebutted the Form 9 finding of left shoulder injury causation so 1% LEC applies; total certified sick leave of 583 days stands; monthly earnings found to be HK$23,000; compensation computed accordingly.
10 Jul 2025

TSE CHI WAI v. CHAN KWAN HO AND OTHERS

Citation

[2025] HKDC 1105
Court

District Court
Case number

DCPI3774/2023

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant were employees of the 2nd Defendant at the material time; the 1st Defendant assaulted the Plaintiff in the course of duties as supervisor and the assault was closely connected to those duties, rendering the 2nd Defendant vicariously liable; the 3rd Defendant was not held to be employer and claim against it dismissed; damages for the Plaintiff assessed at HKD 1,865,740 with interest and specified costs orders.
13 May 2025

SEK TUNG FAT 對朱文傑 and 朱惠嫻 trading as 新發記

Citation

[2025] HKDC 620
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC1811/2023

Court accepted claimant's evidence and wage records as reliable, found claimant was an employee at time of accident, adopted monthly earnings of HK$19,277.98 based on s.11(1)(b) over the available period, accepted Form 7 assessment of 1% permanent loss, and awarded statutory compensation computed as: s.9 HK$9,253.43; s.10 HK$74,027.44; s.10A HK$1,695.00; total HK$84,975.87 together with pre‑ and post‑judgment interest and costs; referred matter to Labour Department for consideration of prosecution under s.40.
22 Jan 2025

WANG XIANGYANG 對 ITMFG LTD

Citation

[2025] HKDC 80
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC2143/2021

On the balance of probabilities the court found the applicant was the respondent's employee because respondent controlled the work, paid wages directly, provided tools, had statutory supervisory obligations as registered minor works contractor, and respondent failed to produce accounting records while its representative's evidence was unreliable; accordingly respondent liable under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance and ordered to pay statutory compensation totalling HK$144,439.83 plus interest and costs.
17 Jan 2025

FAN LIAN v. WONG KA KEUNG

Citation

[2025] HKDC 109
Court

District Court
Case number

DCEC710/2022

The court granted leave because the three supplementary witness statements were relevant, material and necessary to answer new matters raised by the respondent and to fill gaps in the applicant's evidence; no prejudice or trial delay was demonstrated; permitting them serves fair and expeditious disposal and preserves case management; conversely, blanket leave for further reply statements was refused to avoid an endless cycle of evidence.
25 Apr 2024

XIAO LONG 對 LAM TAK YUEN

Citation

[2024] HKCA 330
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV325/2022

The Court dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to show any material or obvious error in the trial judge's factual findings; the trial judge's acceptance that the applicant was the respondent's employee and that the injury occurred in the course of employment was supported by the evidence and not plainly wrong, so the compensation assessment below is upheld.
16 Jun 2023

WONG WAI HUNG v. EASTFORM INDUSTRIES LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1573
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA17/2022

The High Court concluded that the Presiding Officer had considered the relevant evidence and reached a defensible conclusion that the claimant was not an employee, although some aspects of how certain evidence was treated were arguable; accordingly limited leave to appeal was granted on specified grounds but the primary credibility and factual findings were not disturbed.