Court Case: Pregnancy Discrimination at Workplace

Lam Wing Lai v YT Cheng (Chingtai) Ltd

[Court Ruling] [EOC's Comment]

DCEO 6/2004

[2006] 1 HKLRD 639, DC

Background

The Plaintiff was employed in 2001 as an executive secretary to the Director of the Defendant. Her work performance was satisfactory, as evidenced by her salary increment after she had passed the probation period. Later, the Plaintiff became pregnant. In February 2003, the Plaintiff suffered a threatened miscarriage and she informed her boss of the condition. From June to August 2003, the Plaintiff needed to take frequent sick leave due to further pregnancy complications. During this period, the Plaintiff discovered that a permanent secretary was recruited. She worried that the new secretary would be her replacement, though the Defendant assured her that was not the case then.

After the Plaintiff’s childbirth, the Defendant’s human resources manager revealed to the Plaintiff that her boss considered that she should stay at home to look after her baby and take more rest in view of her poor health situation. Nevertheless, the Plaintiff resumed duty upon her completion of maternity leave in November 2002 as scheduled. Yet, she was moved to another work station with no properly equipped computer. Besides, she was not given her original duties. A week later, she was dismissed on the reason that a customer had complained about her.

The Plaintiff brought proceedings against the Defendant under the SDO and the FSDO.

Court’s decision

The Court found that the Plaintiff had established the relevant facts, as stated above, so that inferences could be drawn to support her claims of pregnancy and family status discriminations. On the other hand, the Defendant had failed to offer a reasonable explanation to the Plaintiff’s dismissal. Therefore, it was held that the Defendant had discriminated against the Plaintiff under s. 8(a) and s. 11(2) of the SDO, as well as under s. 5(a) and s. 8(2) of the FSDO.

As a result, the Plaintiff was awarded a total of HK$163,500 and the breakdown of the damages was as follows:

Loss of income	HK$88,500
Injury to feelings	HK$75,000
	HK$163,500

As it took the Plaintiff four and a half months to find a new job, the Court decided that the Plaintiff should recover the loss of income for this period. Since the new job’s salary was lower than the one offered by the Defendant, the Court had also awarded the salary’s difference to the Plaintiff, but limited to a period of three months, as the Court realized that the work in the private sector offered no guarantee of security of salary and employment.

For the injury to feelings, the Court considered that the injury to the Plaintiff in this case was more serious than that inYuen Wai Han v South Elderly Affairs Ltd because the former had worked for the Defendant for one and a half years in a respected position and had established friendship with colleagues. Therefore, the amount of injury to feelings awarded was slightly higher in the present case.

Source: Equal Opportunities Commission