MOHAMMAD JAVID v. MADA CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING LTD.

HCLA 47/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

LABOUR TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO. 47 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM LABOUR TRIBUNAL CLAIM NO. LBTC 230/2002)

____________

____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

Leave to appeal granted on the following grounds:

(1) The Presiding Officer erred in law in failing to have regard to Para. 3(2)(b) of the First Schedule of the Employment Ordinance in determining whether the Claimant have been working under a continuous contract of employment.

(2) The Presiding Officer erred in law in failing to investigate adequately the Claimant's claim that in respect of the five periods of absence from work mentioned in his judgment, 4 periods (viz. except period (d)) were leave taken by the Claimant with the consent of the Defendant and period (d) was due to lack of work on the part of the Defendant.

(3) The Presiding Officer erred in law in dismissing the Claimant's claim for wages in lieu of notice by reason of the Claimant's absence for work between 28 September to 14 October 2001 without considering the undisputed fact that the Claimant worked for the Defendant on 15 October 2001 and the employment of the Claimant was therefore still subsisting on 15 October 2001.