Seafarer’s judicial review refused: industry outside MPF Ordinance

Seafarer Lam Kwai-wing sought judicial review, arguing his industry fell outside the Employment and MPF Ordinances: after dismissal, his employer reclaimed its MPF contributions under the original contract, leaving him no recourse. High Court Justice Lam Man-han found the case meritless and refused leave.

How did the judge rule?

A private contract — beyond the MPFA’s reach. The judge noted Shun Tak’s 2000 employment contract with Lam stated the company could reclaim its voluntary-scheme contributions upon dismissal. As a private contract between the parties, the MPFA had no power to order Shun Tak to return the roughly HK$80,000; the matter had nothing to do with the MPFA.

How did Lam respond?

He called the ruling unfair, saying Hong Kong law gave seafarers no protection, and would consider appealing. Dismissed by Shun Tak Shipping in April the previous year, he had joined Northwest Shipping, which provided MPF coverage. Case no.: HCAL66/11.

The case shows MPF’s safety net does not cover every employee. Workers should check an employer’s retirement arrangements before joining or switching jobs. See the MPF education hub.