As the head of the marketing department of a toy company, Donald strongly felt that the company’s recent TV ads which were full of violence were unsuitable for children.  He knew that his criticisms of the ads at executive meetings did not make him popular among the senior management.  However, Donald was shocked when the company’s president warned him in a firm tone to keep quite on the matter in the coming executive meeting because the ads generated a lot of sales.  The president added that the company had to pay dividends to the shareholders and could not afford to turn down the profit.  

What should Donald do?  Should he refrain from expressing his views because of the president’s warning?   Should he follow his conscience?  Would it be possible to replace the existing advertisements with “healthier” ones?

Fagin was a sole agent for a sports bag imported from a foreign country.  The bags appealed to teenagers and came in various striking colours.  They were renowned for its high quality and being colour-fast.  One day, Fagin received a complaint from a customer that the colour of the bag ran off shortly after the purchase.  Fagin quickly made a refund and hushed up the matter.  To avoid further financial loss, he was planning to get rid of all the stocks by a massive sale on the bags before the related news broke out.  Meanwhile, he also wondered if he should disclose the defect to the distributors in Hong Kong.  He thought it would be fine during massive sale as long as he did not lie about the flaw but simply avoid mentioning it.

Was Fagin acting wrongly?  Would his failure to disclose relevant information be as bad as making false claims about his products?  Should he call back all the defected products from the market in order to maintain a good business reputation?

After graduation, Becky worked in a company that distributed electronic appliances.  When customers phoned the office asking for information on certain electrical appliances, Becky would look up the model, the price, and the inventory level in the computer database.  The boss always instructed Becky to tell the customers that they had the goods in stock, even if it wasn’t true. The boss explained that this tactic was to secure the orders first even when the required model was certainly out of stock in the market.  He argued that, as long as the customers did not know the stock situation, it was no harm for customers to wait and new models could even be suggested while they were waiting.  This stalling tactic was better than letting customers go to the competitors.  The boss’ argument sounded justified, but Becky did not feel comfortable because this meant she had to lie frequently.

What should Becky do?  Would she lose her sense of integrity?  Should she try to win customers in another way?

Lily, a litigation clerk in a solicitor’s firm, was gentle and pleasant by nature.  One day, she was tasked to institute legal proceedings for covering arrears of rents of $900,000 and possession of four premises on behalf of the firm’s client.

Lily visited the premises and spoke to the tenants.  She was appalled by their hardship, especially after hearing the tales of woe spun by the tenants.  She agreed with the tenants that the landlord was too harsh on them and had been charging a cut-throat rent.  Many families would have to sleep in the streets if evicted.

Lily wished that she could do something to help.  She kept stalling for time and deferred carrying out what she had been instructed to do.  Weeks passed.

The client became impatient and complained to Lily’s boss, Henry. Lily made an excuse that she was too busy with other chores at that time. Henry accepted her explanation.  But when the client complained again, Henry started to give pressure on Lily.  Lily went to talk to the tenants who pleaded to Lily desperately.

What should Lily do?  Should she confess that she had not carried out her duty because she was sympathetic to the tenants’ plight? Would her lack of action be an indication of her inefficiency and lack of commitment to her job?  Would they suspect that she had received advantages for so doing?

In the midst of the rush to get overseas passports, Hong Kong people cast their eyes to countries far and near.  Some thought of Pollyanna, a small country in Europe.  Stories went round that there was a quick means to secure a Pollyannese passport.  They only had to make about $500,000 donation to a political party in Pollyanna as well as investing in the property market there.  In this way, they could bypass normal formalities and procure their passports in a short time.  Many people fell for the scheme and got hold of Pollyannese passports in this manner.

Michael was a solicitor who had been in the profession for a long time.  He was now a wealthy man enjoying great respect.  When one of his friends invited him to take on clients and help them to procure Pollyannese passports in this way, Michael began to ponder.

Should he assist in expediting normal procedures?  Would it be alright for him to participate in a shady scheme like this? As a legal professional, should he consider whether the means in achieving the ends were ethical from his professional perspective?

Kenneth, a senior partner of a large solicitor firm, had recently suffered from a tremendous loss in the stock market leading him in serious financial difficulties.  Meanwhile, one of his long-term trusted clients, ABC Limited, was planning to make a series of large investment in overseas property market in which multi-billion deals would be involved.  The company would soon look for a solicitor firm to take care of the legal part of the project.  With the close work relationship, Kenneth knew that his firm would be a favourable choice but other competitors were also fighting hard to get the business.

One day, an old classmate in law school, Joe, invited Kenneth out for a dinner.  Joe was a senior partner of a competitor solicitor firm which was also interested in the project.  Knowing that Kenneth was in great financial debts, Joe made a very tempting suggestion to Kenneth.  Joe asked Kenneth to pass him the project proposal details prepared by Kenneth’s firm.  Then, Joe would copy the same content and submit another proposal before Kenneth’s firm, in order to win the project contract.  In return, Joe would give Kenneth 5% of the contract value as a token of thanks, which would help Kenneth clear off most of his debts.  Kenneth began to think.

Would Kenneth violate any legislation if he accepted Joe’s offer? What should Kenneth do?

Oscar had been in practice for fifteen years and had built up quite a name for himself. He moved around in society and had been Chairman of the Tigers’ Club for two consecutive years and led a very busy social life.

A man called Peter Pang was charged with deception. Though he pleaded not guilty, he was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment by the District Court. Peter’s wife, Wendy, was shaken and wanted to file an appeal. She approached Oscar and asked Oscar to represent her husband in the appeal.

At that time, Oscar had a full load of cases and, without paying much attention, told Peter’s wife that he would handle the matter. He put the case aside for quite a while without proceeding. When he finally had time to pick it up, and tried to have it reviewed at the District Court, he was informed that the review had to be made by the High Court.  Oscar was in trouble. It was already too late for an appeal to be lodged at the High Court.

What should Oscar do? Should he tell Wendy the truth about the present situation?  Or should he come clean and apply to the High Court for special leave so that Peter could pursue his appeal?

Upon her return to Hong Kong after a few years in the States, Sandy worked in La Fonda, an architect firm.  She had her first degree in Hong Kong but left for the US with her boyfriend soon after graduation.  Her performance in the firm was brilliant and the portfolios she submitted were excellent.  When her senior Kelly resigned, her unit head Antonio considered recommending Sandy for promotion to take up Kelly’s post.  Sandy was full of hopes.

Antonio was about to nominate Sandy. One evening, he was talking to his cousin Gamma who just returned from a long stay in the States. Gamma had been doing a doctoral programme in Architecture in the University of Vermont. Antonio causally mentioned to Gamma that his prize staff, Sandy, also worked on a second degree at the University of Vermont too.  Antonio thought that Gamma and Sandy might have met in the University because their years of study coincided. But, to Antonio’s astonishment, Gamma could not recall a Chinese lady studying Architecture during his seven years’ stay at the University, particularly as he worked part-time in the Registrar’s Office.  If Sandy had studied there, Gamma would have remembered her.

Antonio was flabbergasted and determined to look into the matter. When he went back to the office the next day, he sent for Sandy at once.  He asked Sandy if the credentials she submitted to the firm were in order. Sandy guessed what he was getting at and blurted out the truth.   

It was a sad story.  Sandy was about to be married to her boyfriend in US when she found out that he was dating another girl who could help him to get US citizenship. He tore her heart into pieces. After a few years of living only on the money sent from home, Sandy finally decided to turn over a new leaf and went back to Hong Kong.  She built up a portfolio of her own work which was in fact copied from overseas designers and made up an academic and professional history for herself.  Then she landed the job at La Fonda.

Antonio did not know what to do.  Should he expose the fraudulent past of Sandy?  Was it his duty to make sure that the firm was not cheated? Would this destroy the career of Sandy who had been a star in the firm?

Sandy had promised to work hard if Antonio kept her secret for her. Could Antonio do that with a clear conscience?

Jackson and Jonathon were mates in university. They both joined in the same architecture firm as junior architects after graduation. Though they were close friends with similar background, they also competed with each other on almost everything. 

Lately, the company had an internal competition for making a proposal for a redevelopment project of the company’s warehouse in the suburbs. The proposal needed to consider various factors such as the increasing of labour cost, the shortage of land, the unpredictable economic trend, etc. Both Jackson and Jonathon participated in the competition and worked very hard to draw up a winning proposal. Competition between the two friends was fierce. Through personal connection, Jackson got some useful restricted information on the future development of the nearby lots from the Lands Office for his proposal. He casually saved the restricted information to his computer.  One day, Jonathon went to Jackson’s desk asking Jackson out for lunch. Jackson was not around, leaving his draft proposal displayed on the computer screen.  Jonathon took the chance to scan through Jackson’s draft proposal and discovered the restricted information.

Desperate to win the competition and to beat Jackson, Jonathon was in a crossroad. He could easily beat Jackson if he stole Jackson’s ideas and the restricted information to improve his own proposal.

What should Jonathon do? Should Jackson raise an alarm if he found out that Jonathon stole his information? After all, Jackson got the restriction information through improper means.

Clint was a construction engineer at a private housing estate construction site. He had spent most of his time mingling with foremen and construction workers.

Bobby, a site foreman, was working with Clint on the project.  Bobby had an assistant, Chui, who had been his right hand man for many years. On the day, Chui fell ill and Bobby took over the routine check of books and accounts.  He suddenly saw the names of two workers whom he did not recall seeing on the site the day before marked into the attendance book.  He thought it was a mere error of entry but to make sure, he summoned the two workers to come and see him.

When the two workers showed up, Bobby was amazed to see that they were totally unabashed.  They admitted outright that they had been absent the day before and that their chums had clocked in their attendance cards for them.  They were even brazen enough to put forth a number of points to justify what they had done.

They claimed that attendance at work did not necessarily mean that the progress would be faster.  The guys needed time-out and rest in order to restore their strength after their leave days and therefore they could work hard to compensate for the day lost.  The productivity would be higher.  And they had never let Bobby down, had they?  This had been a system drawn up by the workers and everybody knew about it, seeing it as an incentive to their work or even a bonus.  Bobby was aghast.

Worse still, the phone rang at that time.  It was Clint.  He wanted to check out with Bobby about the expenses and asked him to file the site accounting report.

Bobby was at a loss as to what to do.  He wondered how much Chui was involved in this.  If Chui was in the know all along, then he himself would be an incompetent fool not to realise that this was going on under his nose. On the other hand, he did not wish to antagonize his men.  What should he do?

Should he report to Clint and blow the whistle?  Or should he stand by his men, including Chui?   Would it reflect badly on him either way?