More

Employment, Privacy & Discrimination

Hong Kong is one of the best cities to establish and operate a business because of its geographical proximity to Mainland China, business-friendly tax regime and effective legal system.  At ONC Lawyers, our experienced team of lawyers helps companies navigate ongoing local and cross-border employment challenges and workplace issues so that they may fully capture the benefits of conducting business in Hong Kong.  We have the industry knowledge and expertise necessary to help you through complex global and local compliance issues and regulatory challenges.  We understand your business and strive to offer practical, client-focused and timely advice.

We act for a wide range of clients, including listed companies, banks and financial institutions, local and international corporations, statutory bodies as well as small and medium-sized enterprises, individual employers and employees.  Our work covers a comprehensive scope of employment, data protection, privacy and discrimination matters, including wrongful dismissal disputes, senior executive exits, team moves, enforcement of restrictive covenants, breaches of fiduciary duties, employment law issues arising from mergers and acquisitions, regulatory investigations, whistleblowing, employment data protection, and discrimination claims.  We also advise on cross-jurisdictional matters including immigration and visa issues as well as cross-border employee transfers.  We also have solid experience in making and opposing employment-related injunction applications.

The services of our employment, privacy and discrimination practice include:

  • advising on legal obligations and entitlements of employers and employees as well as related issues arising from termination of employment contracts;
  • drafting and reviewing employment contracts as well as tailoring restrictive covenants and garden leave clauses to suit roles and seniority of respective directors and senior employees;
  • drafting and reviewing employee handbooks and human resources policies;
  • dealing with contentious employment and related matters such as disputes arising from restrictive covenants, non-competition undertakings, confidentiality issues, fiduciary duties, duty of fidelity, springboard injunctions and other employment related issues;
  • advising on non-contentious employment matters, including applications for work and residence visas, advice relating to internal disciplinary issues, formulation of human resources strategies in relation to team moves, group reorganisations and workplace restructuring;
  • handling workplace discrimination, sexual harassment and whistleblowing cases;
  • handling privacy litigation and misuse of personal data; and
  • advising on data protection compliance and cybersecurity issues, including compliance programmes, cross-border data transfers and data breaches.

If you would like to know more about our employment, privacy and discrimination practice or how we can help your business, please contact us at (852) 2810 1212 or at employment@onc.hk.


Please refer to our articles in ‘Knowledge’

Our People

Michael Szeto
Michael Szeto
Partner
Dominic Wai
Dominic Wai
Partner
Michael Szeto
Michael Szeto
Partner
Dominic Wai
Dominic Wai
Partner

Recommended Posts

The new measure of “vaccine bubble”: Can employers impose mandatory vaccination?
Recently, the Hong Kong Government has rolled out the new “vaccine bubble” for easing restrictions on restaurants and bars. The new rules have just taken effect at the end of April. For restaurants, on the conditions that their staff have received their first vaccination and diners use the LeaveHomeSafe mobile app, diners can eat in groups of 6 (current limit is 4), and restaurants can open until midnight (currently, restaurants have to close at 10 p.m.). If all the restaurant staff are fully vaccinated and the customers have received their first jabs, the relevant premises will be able to delineate a specified area where operation restrictions can be further relaxed, where diners can eat in groups of 8 until 2 a.m. Naturally, in view of the new measures, restaurants and bars employers would want to have all their employees vaccinated so that business can gradually resume to normal. But can employers make vaccination mandatory for their employees?
When will the court enforce non-competition restrictions in employment contract? Is evidence about matters that happened after the making of the employment contract relevant?
Common law policy is against enforcement of restraints of trade. A clause in an employment contract that restrains the activities of an employee after termination of employment is prima facie void (as being a restraint of trade and contrary to public policy) and unenforceable unless the employer can prove it is reasonable as between the parties, and in the public interest. It is trite that the time for ascertaining the reasonableness of a restrictive covenant is the time of the making of the contract. That said, is evidence about matters that happened after the making of the employment contract relevant for the purpose of determining the reasonableness of a restrictive covenant? In the recent decision of BFAM Partners (Hong Kong) Ltd v Gareth John Mills & Segantii Capital Management Limited [2021] HKCFI 2904, the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) granted an injunction to enforce a six-month non-competition restriction in an employment contract, and discuss this question.
Can an emigrating MPF scheme member make early withdrawal of MPF?
The Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority (“MPFA”) recently reported on the convictions of two mandatory provident fund (“MPF”) scheme members under the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Ordinance (Cap. 485) (“MPFSO”) for making false or misleading statement to an MPF trustee when making early withdrawal application. The two scheme members applied to MPF trustees for early withdrawal of MPF on the grounds of permanent departure from Hong Kong and their applications were approved in December 2006 and April 2013 respectively. Subsequently, they applied to another MPF trustee for early withdrawal on the same ground again in April and May 2018 respectively while falsely declaring that they had not previously been paid any MPF on the same grounds of permanent departure from Hong Kong. Upon MPFA’s verification with previous claim records, MPFA discovered that they made false statements and reported to the Police. They were charged and sentenced to one and two months’ imprisonment respectively with two-year suspension.
Back to top