Read the full judgment text of CACV 000164/1996 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 18 February 1997 before Litton V-P, Godfrey JA, Jerome Chan J.
Administrative and constitutional law – Labour Tribunal – appeal to High Court – jurisdiction – scope of review of findings of fact by Presiding Officer – whether High Court judge may re-evaluate evidence and substitute his own view – Labour Tribunal Ordinance (Cap 25) ss.7, 32, 35, 35A, 35B – whether on primary facts found, only reasonable conclusion was that respondent was employer – claimants were cement off-loaders recruited by Law Cheuk for Wing Sang Transportation Company, which contracted with Green Island Cement Company – off-loaders paid by Law Cheuk from lump sum based on tonnage – respondent was sub-contractor of Wing Sang – Presiding Officer found claimants were not employees of respondent – High Court judge allowed appeal, holding only reasonable conclusion was that respondent was employer – whether judge erred in law – held, the High Court on appeal from the Labour Tribunal is severely circumscribed in its power to interfere with the Tribunal's findings of fact – the High Court may not reverse or vary any determination on questions of fact, but may draw inferences of fact consistent with the Tribunal's primary findings – the High Court may only intervene where the Tribunal's view of the facts could not reasonably be entertained on those primary facts, following the test in Edwards v Bairstow [1956] AC 14 as cited in Lee Ting Seng v Ching Chi Keung [1990] AC 374 – here, the judge erred by holding the only reasonable conclusion was that respondent was the employer, where that conclusion did not necessarily follow from the Presiding Officer's findings of primary fact – the Presiding Officer's finding that claimants were not employees of respondent was not inconsistent with his primary findings, and was one that could reasonably be entertained – the claimants could equally have been employees of Law Cheuk (or his successor Pun Chun) or self-employed – Chang Yuen v The Royal Hong Kong Golf Club, CA 146 of 1996, 7 January 1997, unreported, considered – appeal allowed – judge's order of 1 July 1996 discharged – decision of the Presiding Officer of 8 January 1996 restored – Employment Ordinance (Cap 57) awards can be made only in favour of an employee against an employer.
Legal issues: Scope of High Court's appellate jurisdiction over Labour Tribunal decisions · Whether the Presiding Officer's finding of no employment relationship was reasonable
Outcome: Appeal allowed; the High Court judge's order of 1 July 1996 is set aside and the Presiding Officer's decision of 8 January 1996 dismissing the claimants' applications is restored.