Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Severance payment

Legal area

Court

24 Nov 2023

TSUI KOON WAH v. L&L CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3045
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA21/2023

Leave to appeal refused because the applicant's grounds were factual disputes about credibility and findings of fact by the Deputy Presiding Officer and did not disclose any arguable error of law; the Deputy PO lawfully found sufficient and substantive reasons for dismissal based on conduct and properly applied legal principles regarding vaccine pass, garden leave, notice and redundancy.
18 Dec 2017

LY GIA NIEN v. The Personal Representative of SIR JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, the Deceased

Citation

LY GIA NIEN v. The Personal Representative of SIR JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, the Deceased
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3748/2013

The court accepted the plaintiff’s unchallenged evidence and awarded judgment for the plaintiff in the total sum of HK$749,368.38 comprising arrears of wages, wages in lieu of notice, severance payment, annual leave pay and end of year pay; interest on arrears was awarded under Employment Ordinance s.25 and interest on other items at 2% p.a. from transfer date to judgment and thereafter at judgment rate; costs awarded to plaintiff nisi to be taxed.
17 May 2016

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY BOARD AND ANOTHER

Citation

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY BOARD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV14/2015

s16(2)(f)(i) of the PWIO must be applied to the actual net severance payment owing to the employee (gross entitlement under s31G of the EO less deductions under s31I). Therefore the Commissioner must calculate the cap on the net severance figure, not on the gross s31G figure.
2 Dec 2014

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER

Citation

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV37/2014

Section 16(1) of Cap 380 must be construed to require the Commissioner to use as the starting point either the s31G severance figure or the capped amount computed under s16(2)(f)(i), whichever is less, and then deduct any s31I benefits (eg MPF) to arrive at the ex gratia payment; the Commissioner does not have a general unfettered discretion to determine the quantum beyond that statutory formula.
19 Dec 2013

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER

Citation

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL55/2013

The court held that "the applicant's entitlement to severance payment" in s16(2)(f)(i) of the Protection of Wages on Insolvency Ordinance (Cap 380) means the gross sum calculated under s31G of the Employment Ordinance (Cap 57) prior to any deduction under s31I; consequently the Commissioner's method of calculating the maximum ex gratia payment is correct and the judicial review application is dismissed.
13 May 2013

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER

Citation

YUNG CHI KEUNG v. PROTECTION OF WAGES ON INSOLVENCY FUND BOARD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL55/2013

Leave to commence judicial review was granted because the applicant demonstrated an arguable case that the statutory phrase 'entitlement to severance payment' in s16(2)(f) of Cap 380 may refer to the net sum under s31G of Cap 57 after deductions under s31I, and an arguable case that s31I deductions should apply to s31G rather than to the ex-gratia payment under s16(2)(f).
22 Jun 2010

FONG ANNE v. HONG KONG ADVENTIST HOSPITAL

Citation

FONG ANNE v. HONG KONG ADVENTIST HOSPITAL
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCLA33/2009

Court held that the Presiding Officer erred in law by treating unpaid voluntary stand-by as contractual hours and by applying paragraph 3(2)(b) without evidence of a global contract/mutuality; the Hospital discharged its burden to show six weeks of unexplained absence (three within the crucial 24 months) thereby breaking continuity and disqualifying the claimant from statutory severance although the finding of dismissal by redundancy was supported by evidence; claims on hours requiring detailed factual findings (annual leave, holiday pay, sickness allowance) were remitted to the Labour Tribun…
21 Nov 2008

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. TSAI GE WAH

Citation

COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v. TSAI GE WAH
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV7/2008

Majority held that section 31Y of the Employment Ordinance requires prior gratuities based on length of service to be taken into account and to reduce any statutory long service payment, the Board erred in failing to apply s31Y to earlier gratuities and therefore its factual finding that HK$103,196 was a non-taxable long service payment was legally erroneous, so the Commissioner's appeal succeeds.
6 Feb 2008

馮慶及秦好愛(以萬安膠輪公司的名營業) v. 地政總署署長

Citation

馮慶及秦好愛(以萬安膠輪公司的名營業) v. 地政總署署長
Court

Lands Tribunal
Case number

LDLR3/2006

The Tribunal accepted the Applicants last year adjusted net profit of HKD 234,700 as historic profit due to a steady growth trend, adopted the Respondents estimate of 5 remaining working years (yielding a years-purchase multiplier of ~3 at 20% discount) producing goodwill of HKD 704,100, and on balance of probabilities found the sons did not dwell in the same dwelling as the proprietor at the relevant date so statutory severance was payable and calculated on verified account figures totalling HKD 180,914; total compensation awarded HKD 885,014.
18 Oct 2006

WONG MAN SUM v. WONDERLAND SEA FOOD RESTAURANT O/B LONG YIELD CO LTD

Citation

WONG MAN SUM v. WONDERLAND SEA FOOD RESTAURANT O/B LONG YIELD CO LTD
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV241/2005

Appeal allowed: where successive fixed-term contracts are separated by a break and there is no mutual arrangement or employer conduct treating the employee as continuing in employment during the break, the period does not count as continuous employment under s31B and the severance award cannot stand; a promise or settled expectation to re-employ is insufficient without mutual recognition that employment continued during the break.