6 Aug 2013
CHAN YAT SAN v. FUTURE LUCKY (296) LTD
- Citation
- CHAN YAT SAN v. FUTURE LUCKY (296) LTD
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCLA18/2012
The appeal was allowed because the Presiding Officer, having proceeded in the defendant's absence, failed to adequately investigate and give the defendant an opportunity to call witnesses and to test the claimant's evidence on a central disputed issue (whether the claimant was an employee), such inadequacy rendered the Award unsafe; the judgment below was set aside and the matter remitted for retrial before another presiding officer.