Tadjudin Sunny v HKSAR

13 July 2009, Court of First Instance, Hong Kong

The Court of First Instance dismissed the appeal of the appellant for her claim of 'discretionary performance bonus' (not less than HK$10,000,000) for the year 2007 when she worked in the respondent bank's Distressed Debt Trading Group (subsequently renamed International Special Situation Group) as a mid level employee (a vice-president).

The court said that it was not the intention of the Hong Kong law to provide remedies for loss flowing from the manner in which an employee is dismissed.

"The Employment Ordinance, cap.57, which regulates the general conditions of employment, provides limited protection and remedy in terms of dismissal and termination of employment. The Ordinance is not concerned with the wrongness or rightness of the dismissal or termination itself. Employers, and also employees, are entitled to terminate the employment relationship without cause. The statutory protection is against wrongful dismissal or termination by reason of the failing to give the dismissed employee the notice of termination as agreed in his contract or required by the statue: sections 6 and 7 of the Ordinance. The extent of the protection is therefore limited; there are only provisions for awarding damages based on the period of notice that should have been given."

"As to the protection under Part VIA of the Employment Ordinance, it is not intended to strike at unfair dismissal generally, but only at unfair dismissal in circumstances where the employer dismisses the employee with the intention of extinguishing or reducing the right, benefit or protection conferred upon the employee by the Ordinance."

^