DEPARTMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

公眾關注的法援案件 Cases of Public Interest or Concern 35 Legal Aid Department Annual Report 2007 法律援助署 2007 年報
第三章公眾關注的法援案件 Chapter 3 Cases of Public Interest or Concern 重複的問題 .. 是分判商還是僱員 ? A Sub-contractor or an Employee? A Question Revisited 終審法院在二 ○○ 七年三月作出一項判決 , 該判決再次確認樞密院在 Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi Keung [1990] 2 AC 374 一案中 , 為確定僱主與僱員關係是否存在所採用的基本驗證方法。要確定某人是僱員還是獨立承判商 , 基本的驗證方法是 , 該人履行服務時 , 是否為自己經營的業務提供有關服務。這是一個關乎事實的問題 , 須由主審法官在研究及衡量該人工作時的實際情況後作出裁決。 In a judgment handed down in March 2007, the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) re-affirmed the fundamental test for determining whether an employer and employee relationship existed as laid down in the Privy Council’s decision in Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi Keung [1990] 2 AC 374. The fundamental test in determining whether a person was an employee or an independent contractor is whether or not that person was performing services as a person in business on his own account. It is a question of fact for the trial judge to decide following an investigation and evaluation of the factual circumstances in which that person performed his work. 法院又裁定 , 一九九八年實施的《強制性公積金計劃條例》( 第 485 章 ) 不影上述基本原則。 It was also held that the introduction of the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Ordinance, Cap. 485 (“MPFSO”) in 1998 does not affect these fundamental principles. 本案的上訴人 Y 先生為冷氣工人 , 以散工形式受僱於答辯人。在工作期間 , 一條焊枝突然截斷 , 擊中 Y 先生的左眼 , 令其眼部嚴重受傷。事前 ,Y 先生與答辯人曾達成協議 , 由 Y 先生以自僱人士身分自行安排強制性公積金事宜。 In this case Mr Y was working as a casual air-conditioning worker for the Respondent when a welding rod suddenly shattered and struck his left eye, causing severe eye injury. Mr Y had previously agreed with the Respondent that he would make his own Mandatory Provident Fund arrangements as a self-employed person. 區域法院及上訴法庭均裁定 Y 先生是分判商而非答辯人的僱員 , 原因之一是 Y 先生以自僱人士身分自行支付強制性公積金供款。其後 ,Y 先生獲批法律援助 , 就其申索向終審法院提出上訴。 Mr Y was granted legal aid to take his claim to the CFA after both the District Court and the Court of Appeal found him to be a sub-contractor and not an employee of the Respondent on the grounds that, inter alia, he had made his own Mandatory Provident Fund contributions as a selfemployed person. Legal Aid Department Annual Report 2007 法律援助署 2007 年報 36
Page 1 and 2: 法律援助署二 ○○ 七
Page 3 and 4: 目錄 Contents 前言 Foreword 1
Page 5 and 6: 報告指出一些可予改
Page 7 and 8: 為節省儲存檔案文件
Page 9 and 10: 前瞻 Looking Ahead 本署會
Page 11 and 12: 第一章部門策略計劃
Page 13 and 14: 顧客服務 Customer Services
Page 15 and 16: 員工 Staff 要提供優質
Page 17 and 18: 第二章法律援助服務
Page 19 and 20: 二 ○○ 六至二 ○○ 七
Page 21 and 22: 案件類別 Case Type 追討
Page 23 and 24: 刑事法律援助 Legal Aid i
Page 25 and 26: 法援申請被拒 Refusal of
Page 27 and 28: 法律援助輔助計劃 Sup
Page 29 and 30: 二 ○○ 七年委派外委
Page 31 and 32: 訴訟服務 Litigation Services
Page 33 and 34: 年內 , 該組律師辦理
Page 35 and 36: 十二月二十日中國法
Page 37: 尹建成先生總部申請
Page 41 and 42: 刑事案件的法律援助
Page 43 and 44: 大廈業主立案法團對
Page 45 and 46: 在上訴時 , 代表原告
Page 47 and 48: 終審法院裁定原告人
Page 49 and 50: 第四章提升服務 Chapter
Page 51 and 52: 本署會不時檢討下列
Page 53 and 54: 顧客服務的培訓 Trainin
Page 55 and 56: 特別職務及研究小組
Page 57 and 58: 蘇李少卿女士法律及
Page 59 and 60: 第五章宣傳工作 Chapter
Page 61 and 62: 接待來訪團體 Visits to D
Page 63 and 64: 刊物 Publications 本署在
Page 65 and 66: 第六章組織、行政及
Page 67 and 68: 與工作相關的專業培
Page 69 and 70: 本署提倡網上學習 ,
Page 71 and 72: 員工關係及溝通 Staff R
Page 73 and 74: 本署定期檢討資源運
Page 75 and 76: 內部審核 Internal Audit 內
Page 77 and 78: 吳錦堂先生行政組文
Page 79 and 80: 附錄 Appendices 附錄 1 Append
Page 81 and 82: 法律援助輔助計劃基
Page 83 and 84: (A) 申請服務 ( 經濟審
Page 85 and 86: (C) 訴訟期間 - 訴訟結
Page 87 and 88: 附錄 4 Appendix 4 法律援
Page 89 and 90:
九龍分署 Kowloon Branch Offi
Page 91 and 92:
其他刊物 1. 法援年報
show all

DEPARTMENT

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?