ipl-logo

Bus 210 Week 1

448 Words2 Pages

Law Level In chapter 210 S.18c, a person who knows that payment on spot for goods is needed but makes off without payment dishonestly to avoid payment shall be guilty of an offence. Maximum three years of imprisonment.

Employer can summarily dismiss an employee without notice of termination or wages in lieu of notice and no compensation when he disobeys a lawful and reasonable order, misconduct himself, is guilty of fraud or is habitually neglectful in his duties.

There are three elements that needed to prove as defamation.
First, the words were defamatory materials as to lower victim’s reputation. Second, the defamatory materials were referred to the victim and published by the tortfeasor. Last, the defamatory materials were published …show more content…

She dismisses Stephen without notice of termination or wages in lieu of notice and no any compensation.

Shirley’s Speech includes defamatory materials that would lower Stephen’s reputation but she didn’t say it to public or third parties. Conclusion The Department of Justice can sue Stephen by making off without payment in theft ordinance. However, Stephen didn’t mean to steal the perfume, it’s only a misunderstanding between Stephen and the security guard. Therefore, Stephen needs not to suffer the remedies and he shouldn’t be dismissed summarily.

About the summary dismissal, Stephen can sue Shirley through Labour Tribunal as an unreasonable dismissal and the company breaches of terms of employment contract to apply for order of re-engagement or award of terminal payments against employer.

As Stephen didn’t have a serious faults during work time, Shirley could not summarily dismiss him. Therefore, Stephen can claim back the wages due for work done and wages in lieu of notice of termination of a contract is needed without giving the required notice. Also, Stephen had worked there for 14 years, he could get a long services payment if Shirley would like to dismiss him. The maximum long services payment is HKD$390000. For the order of re-engagement, it depends on Stephen and the

Open Document