4 Nov 2020
On uncontested evidence and by default judgment respondent contravened SDO and FSDO by dismissing claimant for reasons connected to pregnancy and family status; assessed damages were compensatory and reflective of precedents: HK$55,000 for injury to feelings, HK$55,218 for loss of earnings, HK$6,000 punitive damages, totaling HK$116,218 with specified interest and costs to be taxed.
4 Nov 2016
On the evidence and on the balance of probabilities the court found that the defendants repeatedly entered the plaintiff's private business premises and, by refusing to leave when asked, engaged in unlawful trespass and conduct amounting to harassment; the second and third defendants were acting as agents of the first defendant based on recordings, conduct and admissions; accordingly a permanent injunction protecting all plaintiff business premises was warranted and the plaintiff was entitled to damages of HKD50,000 (general) and HKD30,000 (punitive) and costs.
16 Feb 2015
The Court struck out the appeal because the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action, amounted to an abuse of process in light of prior related proceedings and lack of pleaded representative standing, rendering the appeal without real prospect of success; the Court further granted costs and imposed a civil restraint order restricting further related litigation without leave.
23 May 2003
Because the Defendant unlawfully rescinded the Plaintiff's employment due to pregnancy and maliciously reported her to the police, the Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages for loss of income ($62,500) and injury to feelings ($62,500) and punitive damages ($30,000), totalling $155,000, guided by Vento bands and s.76(3A)(8).
31 May 1996
The leave to appeal is refused because the contested difference in commission was based on a factual finding (that override commission required unattained sales targets) and therefore raises no question of law; the other grounds either involve exercises of discretion that were not perverse or concern matters outside the Tribunal's punitive powers, and the witness expenses were subsumed in the awarded $2,000.