Howse Williams 何韋律師行 updates

Overturning lower court's decision – Court of Final Appeal hands down milestone judgment to LGBT community
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 10 July 2019

The Court of Final Appeal recently handed down a landmark judgment in favour of the LGBT community. Employers are recommended to review their policies to ensure that they are in line with the principles laid down in the decision. In particular, employers should ensure that spousal employment benefits (eg, those set out in employment contracts) also apply to same-sex spouses, in addition to opposite-sex spouses.

When 'wages' mean more than just your salary
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 03 April 2019

In Hong Kong, an employment contract can be terminated by either the employer or the employee by giving the other party notice or making a payment in lieu of notice. A payment in lieu of notice is calculated by reference to the average daily wages earned by the employee in the 12 months preceding the day on which notice of termination is given. It is therefore important to understand what is meant by 'wages' under the Employment Ordinance.

Labour Tribunal orders claimant to provide security payment – speed bump for parties with weak claims
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 30 January 2019

Since 2014 the Labour Tribunal has had the power to order parties to provide security for awards or orders. The grounds for making such an order are relatively broad and give the tribunal considerable discretion. However, there has been little case law on how this discretion should be exercised. A recent Court of First Instance decision sheds some light on this area of law.

Court limits scope of non-solicitation restrictions
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 21 November 2018

A Hong Kong court recently considered the enforcement of a non-solicitation clause against an employee who was employed as a delivery worker. The court's observations in this case as regards the enforceability of non-solicitation clauses reiterate the well-established position that employers have no right to be protected against competition per se.

Could moonlighting employees be breaching more than just their employment contracts?
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 03 October 2018

In Hong Kong, there is an increasing emphasis on the importance of reciprocal duties of trust and confidence between employers and employees. 'Moonlighting' employees (even ones who take up ancillary employment with a non-direct competitor) often sit in a legally precarious position, since questions are bound to arise in relation to their fiduciary duties, restrictive covenants and the implied term of trust and confidence.

Preventing employment discrimination versus upholding status of marriage
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 15 August 2018

The Basic Law states that "the freedom of marriage of Hong Kong residents and their right to raise a family freely shall be protected by law". This protection is understood to be limited to marriage between monogamous heterosexual couples, which has led to debate on the equal treatment of homosexual couples. The principal issue is that treating same-sex relationships differently is discriminatory. The Court of Appeal recently considered this issue from an employment perspective.

First Conduct Rule breaches: not just anti-competitive, but illegal
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 20 June 2018

The Competition Commission recently issued an advisory bulletin on the potential risks that could arise under the Competition Ordinance (Cap 619) in the employment context. The commission identified a number of practices between employers which are at risk of contravening the First Conduct Rule of the ordinance – specifically, wage-fixing and non-poaching agreements and the exchange of sensitive information.

With great power comes great responsibility
Howse Williams 何韋律師行
  • Employment & Benefits
  • Hong Kong
  • 30 May 2018

In a recent case, a senior employee was found to have acted as a de facto director of the plaintiff company as a result of her position and responsibilities within the company. Consequently, the employee was held to have breached the fiduciary duties which she owed to the company by diverting business opportunities away from it and making unauthorised use of its resources.

Current search