How one line in a termination letter cost an employer a full year of an executive's pay
A fish-trading company failed to overturn an order to pay a departing sales executive a full year's salary, Cheng J ruled on 28 May 2026.
The dispute turned on a single line in a termination letter. The executive had run the company's sales operation since 2013 as its vice president of sales. His contract carried a non-competition clause and, at clause 8.3, a matching promise: if the company chose to hold him to that restriction after he left, it had to say so within three weeks and pay him compensation equal to one hundred per cent of his annual basic salary.
When the company ended his employment on 22 February 2024 with payment in lieu of notice, its termination letter told him to abide by the restrictions in clause 8. The executive read that instruction as the company electing to enforce the non-compete, which in his view switched on the compensation promise. In September 2024 he brought a claim in the Labour Tribunal for HK$2.6 million, a year's pay under clause 8.3.
A company director had met him on the day of termination to walk through the terms. According to the company's own account, after about ten minutes the executive stood, said "I understand. I don't agree", and left without signing. He was paid only the sums the law already owed him: wages for days worked, pay in lieu of notice, and long service pay.
The tribunal's deputy presiding officer handed down judgment on 11 March...
TikToker Camilla Alhassan Jailed 1 Year Over False Claims About Prez Mahama BBC CNN DW CGTN NBC ABC ALJazeera France24 JoyNews CitiTV Net2TV TV3 UTV DelayTV KofiTV MagrahebTV MGTV OTHERS | Movies...