Labour Dispute Over Unpaid Dual Wages: Employee Loses Appeal for 10,383 Yuan in Southern China

Labour Dispute Over Unpaid Dual Wages: Employee Loses Appeal for 10,383 Yuan in Southern China

CASE OVERVIEW

A labour dispute over unpaid dual wages for failing to sign a written employment contract reached the appellate court in Southern China. The employee, Mr. Shi, appealed a lower court decision that denied his claim for 10,383.4 yuan in dual wage compensation. The intermediate court upheld the original judgment, finding that a valid employment contract existed between the parties.

CASE BACKGROUND AND FACTS

Mr. Shi commenced employment with a digital image design company in Southern China on October 4, 2008. The company, referred to as the respondent, operated in the graphic design industry. Mr. Shi claimed that the company failed to sign a written employment contract with him, and he sought dual wage compensation for the period from November 4, 2008, to November 23, 2008.

During the initial trial at the district court in Southern China, Mr. Shi submitted a copy of an employment contract that bore his signature dated November 24, 2008. However, this document did not carry the company’s seal or any authorised signature. The company, in response, produced its own version of the employment contract. The only material difference between the two documents was that the company’s version included the corporate seal and signature.

COURT PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE

The case proceeded through the district court, which issued a judgment under case number (2010) Shen Fu Fa Min Si Chu Zi No. 1385. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Mr. Shi appealed to the intermediate court in Southern China. The appellate court formed a collegiate panel to review the case.

Both parties presented their respective versions of the employment contract. The court examined the contents of both documents and found that they were identical in all substantive terms. The only variation was the presence of the company’s seal on the respondent’s copy. Mr. Shi argued that the absence of the company’s seal on his copy proved that no valid contract had been signed.

The appellate court confirmed that the facts as found by the lower court were accurate and adopted them in full.

COURT FINDINGS AND JUDGMENT

The court held that a clear employment relationship existed between Mr. Shi and the company. Both parties were bound by the rights and obligations set out in labour laws and regulations.

Regarding the existence of an employment contract, the court determined that Mr. Shi’s version of the contract, although lacking the company’s seal, did not negate the fact that a contract had been executed. The company’s version, which included the seal, confirmed that both parties had agreed to the terms. The court stated that the contract contained all essential elements required by law, and Mr. Shi’s own signature on both versions demonstrated his consent.

The court therefore affirmed the lower court’s finding that a written employment contract was signed on November 24, 2008. Mr. Shi’s argument that no contract existed was rejected.

On the issue of dual wage compensation, the court acknowledged that the company was required by law to pay Mr. Shi double wages for the period from November 4, 2008, to November 23, 2008, because the contract was not signed until November 24, 2008. The lower court had already calculated the correct amount for this period. The appellate court confirmed that calculation.

Mr. Shi’s claim for an additional 10,383.4 yuan in dual wage compensation was dismissed as lacking both factual and legal basis.

The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment. The appellant was ordered to pay the second-instance case acceptance fee of 10 yuan.

KEY LEGAL PRINCIPLES

Under Chinese labour law, an employer must sign a written employment contract with an employee within one month of the start of employment. Failure to do so results in liability for dual wage compensation for the period of non-compliance.

A contract that contains all substantive terms required by law and is signed by the employee may still be considered valid even if the employer’s seal is absent, provided the employer produces a sealed copy or otherwise confirms the agreement.

The burden of proof falls on the employee to demonstrate that no contract was signed. A self-signed document without the employer’s seal, standing alone, is not sufficient to disprove the existence of a contract.

PRACTICAL INSIGHTS

Employees should retain a signed and sealed copy of their employment contract. A document that only bears the employee’s signature may create ambiguity and weaken a claim for dual wages.

Employers must ensure that employment contracts are signed and sealed within the statutory one-month period. Delays, even short ones, can give rise to dual wage liability for the gap period.

Both parties should maintain clear records of contract execution dates. The date of signing is critical in calculating any dual wage period.

LEGAL REFERENCES

Labour Law of the People’s Republic of China
Labour Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China
Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, Article 153, Paragraph 1, Item 1

DISCLAIMER

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their situation.