DOCSLIB.ORG

Law for Change Student Competition 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Law for Change Student Competition 2017 LAW FOR CHANGE STUDENT COMPETITION 2017 Sponsored by I II 1 FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS aw is a tool for social change. For all the theoretical wrangling that goes on in the PILnet extends its deepest appreciation to the WYNG Foundation, as it has made the Law for classroom, and high-minded discussions of its use as a social framework, law can be a Change Student Competition possible through its generous support. practical, in-the-pocket means to put good and fair ideas into play. L Special thanks to the Law for Change Student Competition judges, legal mentors, Advisory As public discourse about the rule of law in Hong Kong gains traction, we need to talk about Board members and venue supporting partners. real access. How can we take “access to justice” out of the confines of legal jargon, and apply it on behalf of low-income and vulnerable communities? How can we put legal tools within reach of populations that law itself is built to serve? This competition is designed to get students to ask these very questions. As participants, they must apply what they have learned in the Judges: classroom to issues that we all see in the street, and consider how they might enhance the Prof Raees Baig impact of non-governmental organizations and, in turn, amplify access to justice. The Hon Mr Justice Kemal Bokhary Mr Robert Precht In 2017, PILnet: The Global Network for Public Interest Law (“PILnet”), with the support of the WYNG Foundation, established the Law for Change Student Competition. The competition Legal mentors: aims to stimulate engagement in public interest law among law students in Hong Kong Mr Kay Chan through the development of projects that use the law to address social justice issues and Mr Alan Leong Kah-kit, SC increase access to justice. Projects will further the work of organisations that provide direct Ms Anita Leung services to low-income and vulnerable communities. Many organisations are inexperienced in Ms Angela Li using the law to address structural injustice and, without additional resources, are unable to Ms Janie Wong offer legal assistance. These projects will be designed to help organisations gain experience in using the law to support the low-income and vulnerable communities. Team Mr Jonathan Chang, Mr Kevin So, Mr Bo Huang, Mr Erwin Yau, Ms Katie Chan, This publication is a collection of the project proposals as submitted by the six competition Ms Angela Cheng, Mr Sui Hang Hui, Ms Noble Mak finalists. The proposals are the sole work of the teams and are published by PILnet in their unedited form with their permission. Team Ms Iris Leung, Ms Honnah Lee, Ms Candy Au, Mr Anthony Lo, Ms Ying Kiu Chow THEME The theme for the 2017 Law for Change Student Competition is “Equality”. Equality is commonly Advisory Board members: understood to mean equal treatment, with people being given the same resources and Ms Fion Chan opportunities. Equal treatment, however, may not necessarily result in equality, because people Ms Cheung Lai Wah live in different circumstances, face different challenges and have different needs. Equality Prof Puja Kapai encompasses equal treatment as an ideology, a codification of the idea, and the actions that Ms Teresa Ma address these specific circumstances. Student teams must build projects that demonstrate Mr David Tully how the law can be used as a tool to achieve equality. Ms Yan Yan Yip PRIZE The winner of the competition will be selected by a panel of three judges, and will receive Venue supporting partners: a seed grant of HK$50,000 to implement their project. The winning team is expected to implement their project within six to twelve months immediately following the end of the competition. PILnet Hong Kong January 2018 2 3 JUDGING PANEL The panel of judges for the inaugural Law for Change Student Competition is comprised of experts on the rule of law and social justice issues in Hong Kong. Mr Robert Precht Mr Robert E. Precht is president of Justice Labs, a career mentoring website for public interest lawyers and law Prof Raees Baig students, and co-founder of Hong Kong Public Interest Law Group (HKPIL). He served in Beijing as the China country Prof Raees Baig is an assistant professor in the department director of PILnet: The Global Network for Public Interest of social work at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her Law from 2008 to 2012. research interests include social policy, civil society and political participation as well as human rights and equality. Prior to his work in China, Mr Precht served as an assistant She was previously an honourary lecturer at University of dean of the University of Michigan Law School and Hong Kong. assistant federal defender in Manhattan, New York. He is the author of Defending Mohammad (Cornell University Prof Baig has been working for various local and Press, 2003), and has written for The New York Times, international human rights organizations including the Washington Post, South China Morning Post and other Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor and The Hong Kong publications. Council of Social Service. She was also a Senior Minority Fellow under the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2013. She is currently the vice-chairperson of HER Fund, a registered charity that promotes women’s rights and gender equality. The Hon Mr Justice Kemal Bokhary The Hon Mr Justice Bokhary became a non-permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal in 2012. Mr Justice Bokhary was born in Hong Kong, received his legal education in London and became a member of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in 1967. Mr Justice Bokhary joined the Hong Kong Judiciary as a judge of the High Court in 1989. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal in 1993. From 1997 to 2012, he served as a permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal. Since retirement as a permanent judge, he has published a number of books including Recollections (2013), The Law is a Crocodile (2013), Crocodile-at-Law (2014), Human Rights: Source, Content and Enforcement (2015), and Croc of Final Appeal (2017). 4 5 TEAM 1 2017 LAW FOR CHANGE STUDENTS’ STUDENT PROPOSALS COMPETITION 2017 TEAM 2 PAGE TEAM TEAM TITLE Equalising Rights of the Intellectually 7 Team 1 Equalising Rights of the Intellectually Disabled in the Context of Access to 1 Disabled in the Context of Access to Justice and Political Participation Justice and Political Participation TEAM 3 24 Team 2 What are we abandoning: MEMBERS Scavengers or Trash Ho Hiu Ching Tang Wai Ching 37 Team 3 Community Mediation Clinic Law Yuen Shan Woo Hiu Ching 54 Team 4 Outreach Legal Talks Initiative SCHOOL (“OUTLET”) The University of Hong Kong TEAM 4 66 Team 5 Mobile App Just Law – Your Pocket Legal Assistant 84 Team 6 Nutri-Care TEAM 5 TEAM 6 6 7 1 INTRODUCTION 2 RELEVANT TERMINOLOGY TEAM 1 TEAM 1 Equality, a universally-accepted value, is of fundamental and inadequate exposures to the existence of the 2.1. Intellectually Disabled 2.2 Access to Justice importance in a civilised society like Hong Kong (HK) rights that everyone deserves but are absent due to The definition of “intellectually disabled” provided It is a fundamental element of rule of law appreciated because it coincides with beliefs like equal human the stagnant development of laws. The intellectually by American Association on Intellectual and as a core value of Hong Kong. According to the United dignity and mutual respect. It is not about treating disabled need special care and assistance in realising Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), which is widely States Institute of Peace, access of justice does not limit everyone equally, but treating the unequals unequally their legal and political rights, not to mention striving recognised by HK NGOs focusing on intellectual to one’s access to courts and legal representation, but which gives rise to equal opportunities. To achieve for a change in law. disabilities e.g. Hong Chi Association, is referred to in also one’s ability to seek and obtain a remedy through equality, laws play an important role in protecting the this proposal: formal or informal institutions of justice for grievances minorities’ rights through expressed and unequivocal Inspired by these, we will focus on safeguarding and in line with the standards related to human rights. This TEAM 2 texts. equalising the rights of the intellectually disabled, in a) The person has demonstrated significant sub- includes normative legal protection, legal awareness, particular to ease their access to justice and promote average limitation in intellectual functioning, legal aid and counsel, adjudication, enforcement, and Instead of a general anti-discrimination law as in the political rights that lack progression in HK and are often including comprehension, memory, use of civil society oversight. United Kingdom, Hong Kong (HK) relies on four anti- neglected. In light of the limited resources and short information, problem solving. discrimination ordinances, including the Disability duration for implementation of our proposal, although b) The person bears limitations in adaptive behaviour It is remarked that with reference to the context and Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 487) (DDO) which we could proactively advocate for the intellectually including conceptual (e.g. language, calculation and purpose our proposal, the gist lies in “equal access to lists thoroughly the equitable rights that ought to be disabled’ rights on their behalf, the reality dictates that comprehension), social (e.g. interpersonal skills) and justice”, meaning that barriers as to both quantity and enjoyed by the legally recognised disabled people in the impact to the society will be poignant at first but practical skills (e.g. personal care and occupational quality of justice accessed by the intellectually disabled areas of employment, education and enjoyment of fleeting and unsustainable.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Rule of Law in an Evolving Democracy Syed Kemal Bokhary* I
    THE RULE OF LAW IN AN EVOLVING DEMOCRACY Syed Kemal Bokhary* No democratic arrangement is perfect. All are open to abuse. Still democracy’s blessings are self-evident. Hong Kong’s democracy is evolving, and still far from fully realised. Everybody agrees that an increase is needed. But the pace and form of the increase are matters of political controversy. Absent full democracy, can the rule of law prevail? Yes, but only on certain conditions. There has to be independent judicial stewardship of an entrenched constitution. Powers must be properly separated. Human rights must be protected conformably with international norms.1 And the existence of the rule of law must not be treated as justification for delay in democratic development. Without defining the rule of law, these conditions illustrate its nature. I. Judicial Independence and an Entrenched Constitution Our judiciary – as I have previously explained in Hong Kong2, in Mainland China 3 and overseas 4 – is independent. And it is well served by an able profession, a learned academy, a free media and an alert population. Hong Kong’s constitution is entrenched. Initially our constitutional instruments were the Letters Patent and the Royal Instructions. In 1991 they were joined by the Bill of Rights which is modelled on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Today our constitution is the Basic Law. It came into force upon the handover by which Chinese sovereignty of Hong Kong was resumed on 1 July 1997. By its preamble, the Basic Law declares the “one country, two systems” principle. It is pursuant to this principle that Hong Kong’s system is preserved different from the Mainland’s.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
    FACV Nos. 9 & 10 of 2006 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NOS. 9 & 10 OF 2006 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NOS. 297 & 298 OF 2004) _______________________ Between: SIEGFRIED ADALBERT UNRUH Plaintiff (Respondent) - and - HANS-JOERG SEEBERGER 1st Defendant (1st Appellant) EGANAGOLDPFEIL (HOLDINGS) LIMITED 2nd Defendant (2nd Appellant) _______________________ Court: Chief Justice Li , Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ and Mr Justice McHugh NPJ Dates of Hearing: 15, 16 and 18 January 2007 Date of Judgment: 9 February 2007 _______________________ J U D G M E N T _______________________ Chief Justice Li: 1. I agree with the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ. — 2 — Mr Justice Bokhary PJ: 2. I agree with the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ. Mr Justice Chan PJ: 3. I have read the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ in draft. I agree entirely with his comprehensive analysis and conclusions. I too would dispose of these appeals as proposed by him in the concluding paragraph of his judgment. Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ: A. The parties and the issues 4. On 19 September 1992, the plaintiff (“Mr Unruh”) entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (“the MoA”) with the 1st defendant (“Mr Seeberger”). The MoA provides that under certain circumstances, Mr Unruh is to become entitled to payment of a “Special Bonus”. Mr Unruh contends that such entitlement has arisen and, not having been paid, brought proceedings to recover the same from Mr Seeberger and from the 2nd defendant (“Egana”, formerly called Haru International (Holdings) Limited).
    [Show full text]
  • In the Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
    FACV No. 17 of 2008 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2008 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 248 OF 2006) _____________________ Between : PECONIC INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LTD Plaintiff (Appellant) - and - LAU KWOK FAI 1st Defendant (Respondent) ALBERT K.K. LUK & CO. (a firm) 2nd Defendant K.F. LAU & CO. (a firm) 3rd Defendant (Respondent) _____________________ FACV No. 18 of 2008 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2008 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 245 OF 2006) _____________________ - 2 - Between : PECONIC INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LTD Plaintiff (Appellant) - and – LAU KWOK FAI 1st Defendant ALBERT K.K. LUK & CO. (a firm) 2nd Defendant (Respondent) K.F. LAU & CO. (a firm) 3rd Defendant _____________________ Court : Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Litton NPJ and Lord Hoffmann NPJ Dates of Hearing : 9 to 11 February 2009 Date of Judgment : 27 February 2009 J U D G M E N T Mr Justice Bokhary PJ : 1. I agree with the judgment of Lord Hoffmann NPJ. Mr Justice Chan PJ : 2. I agree with the judgment of Lord Hoffmann NPJ. Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ : 3. I agree with the judgment of Lord Hoffmann NPJ. - 3 - Mr Justice Litton NPJ : 4. On 1 June 2006, after trial, the judge ordered Danny Lau to pay to Peconic the sum of HK$350,534,416, leaving the question of interest and cost for later determination. He also gave judgment against the firms Albert K.K.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
    FACV No. 5 of 2005 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2005 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 43 OF 2004) _____________________ Between: TRIPOLE TRADING LIMITED 1st Defendant/Appellant ZHENG LIE LIE 2nd Defendant/Appellant DING PENG 4th Defendant/Appellant - and - PROSPERFIELD VENTURES LIMITED Plaintiff/Respondent _____________________ FACV No. 6 of 2005 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 6 OF 2005 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 35 OF 2004) _____________________ Between: DING PENG 1st Defendant/Appellant ZHENG LIE LIE 2nd Defendant/Appellant CHINA PROJECTS LIMITED 5th Defendant/Appellant - and - PANCO INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LIMITED Plaintiff/Respondent _____________________ - 2 - Court: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Litton NPJ and Lord Hoffmann NPJ Dates of Hearing: 7, 8 and 9 December 2005 Date of Judgment: 5 January 2006 J U D G M E N T Mr Justice Bokhary PJ and Mr Justice Chan PJ : 1. We would allow both appeals and make the orders proposed by Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ and Mr Justice Litton NPJ in their joint judgment, doing so for the reasons given in that joint judgment and in Lord Hoffmann NPJ’s judgment. Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ and Mr Justice Litton NPJ : Introduction 2. These two appeals (heard together) concern the equitable remedies that might properly flow from admitted breaches of fiduciary duties on the part of company directors. 3. There are two plaintiffs. One is Prosperfield Ventures Ltd (“Prosperfield”); the other is Panco Industrial Holdings Ltd (“Panco”).
    [Show full text]
  • Civil) (On Appeal from Cacv No
    FACV No. 11 of 2002 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 11 OF 2002 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 186 OF 2002) _______________________ Between: MERCK SHARP & DOHME LIMITED Appellant - and - THE REGISTRAR OF PATENTS Respondent _______________________ Court: Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Silke NPJ and Lord Millett NPJ Date of Hearing: 25 November 2002 Date of Judgment: 5 December 2002 _______________________ J U D G M E N T _______________________ Mr Justice Bokhary PJ: 1. I agree with the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ. Mr Justice Chan PJ: 2. I agree with the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ. — 2 — Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ: 3. In this appeal, it falls to be considered whether certain sections of the Patents (General) Rules (“the Rules”) are ultra vires. The relevant provisions are those which lay down a one month time-limit for effecting registration of a court order for amendment of a patent made under s 46 of the Patents Ordinance, Cap 514 (“the Ordinance”) and which preclude the Registrar of Patents (“the Registrar”) from granting any extension of time for registration. They are s 39(1) and that part of s 100(2) of the Rules which refers to s 39(1) (together “the relevant rules”). The facts 4. A pharmaceutical patent, namely, European Patent Publication No. EP 0411 668 (“the European Patent”), was filed by the appellant, a United Kingdom company, at the European Patent Office on 3 August 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politics of Constitutional Common Law in Hong Kong Under Chinese Sovereignty
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by UW Law Digital Commons (University of Washington) Washington International Law Journal Volume 25 Number 3 Asian Courts and the Constitutional Politics of the Twenty-First Century 6-1-2016 The Politics of Constitutional Common Law in Hong Kong under Chinese Sovereignty Eric C. Ip Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wilj Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Eric C. Ip, The Politics of Constitutional Common Law in Hong Kong under Chinese Sovereignty, 25 Wash. L. Rev. 565 (2016). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wilj/vol25/iss3/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington International Law Journal by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Compilation © 2016 Washington International Law Journal Association THE POLITICS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMON LAW IN HONG KONG UNDER CHINESE SOVEREIGNTY Eric C. Ip† Abstract: This article studies how the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal has come to develop a sophisticated judicial gloss on the provisions of the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s constitutional document, in ways unforeseen by the Chinese National People’s Congress that enacted it. The ascendancy of constitutional common law in Hong Kong after the end of British rule is remarkable when considered in light of the continuing denial of democratic self-rule by China’s authoritarian Party-state.
    [Show full text]
  • Christopher Leong
    FEBRUARY 2019 二零一九年二月 HK$308 h k - l a w y e r . org Cover Story 封面專題 Face to Face with 專 訪 Christopher Leong President, LAWASIA 梁肇富 LAWASIA會長 PUBLIC RECORDS 公 共 記 錄 ACCESS TO INFORMATION 索取資料 ARBitratioN 仲裁 An Overview of the An Overview of the Is the Right to Appeal Appealing to Consultation Paper on Consultation Paper on Access the Commercial World? Archives Law to Information 對仲裁裁決的上訴權是否對商業社 概述檔案法諮詢文件 《公開資料》諮詢文件概覽 會具有吸引力? SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES NOW AVAILABLE! Contact Tracy at [email protected] SAVE THE DATE! to join the mailing list to receive INDIA - February 28 event updates and submission details. MALAYSIA - March 28 Contact Amantha at [email protected] SE ASIA - April 11 for more information on sponsorship and get publicity across the region. CHINA - April 18 JAPAN - June 12 SHARE YOUR ALB MOMENTS ON HONG KONG - September 6 SOCIAL MEDIA #ALBAWARDS INDONESIA - October 10 PHILIPPINES - October 25 KOREA - November 14 WWW.LEGALBUSINESSONLINE.COM/LAW-AWARDS Hong Kong Lawyer 香港律師 www.hk-lawyer.org The official journal of The Law Society of Hong Kong (incorporated with limited liability) 香港律師會 (以有限法律責任形式成立) 會刊 HONG KONG LAWYER www.hk-lawyer.org THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG 香港律師會會刊 Editorial Board 編輯委員會 Chairman 主席 Huen Wong 王桂壎 Inside your February issue Nick Chan 陳曉峰 Peter CH Chan 陳志軒 二月期刊內容 Charles CC Chau 周致聰 Michelle Cheng 鄭美玲 Heidi KP Chu 朱潔冰 編者的話 Julianne P Doe 杜珠聯 3 Editor’S Note Elliot Fung 馮以德 4 PRESIDENT’S Message 會長的話 Steven Brian Gallagher Warren P Ganesh 莊偉倫 6 CONTRIButors 投 稿 者 Julienne Jen 任文慧
    [Show full text]
  • FACV No. 15 of 2013 in the COURT of FINAL APPEAL of the HONG
    FACV No. 15 of 2013 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 2013 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NO. 267 OF 2011) _______________________ Between : GHULAM RBANI Plaintiff (Appellant) and SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE for and on behalf of the Defendant DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION (Respondent) _______________________ Before: Chief Justice Ma, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Tang PJ, Mr Justice Bokhary NPJ and Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe NPJ Date of Hearing: 25 February 2014 Date of Judgment: 13 March 2014 J U D G M E N T Chief Justice Ma: 1. I agree with the judgment of Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ. -2- Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ: 2. The appellant brought proceedings against the Director of Immigration for damages for false imprisonment claiming that he had been unlawfully detained purportedly under section 32 of the Immigration Ordinance (“IO”).1 His claim was dismissed by HH Judge Leung in the District Court2 and his appeal against that judgment was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.3 Leave to appeal to this Court was given by the Appeal Committee4 on the basis that a point of law of the requisite importance arises on the appeal, namely: “To what extent are the detention powers contained in section 32(2A) of the IO subject to an applicable principle of law barring arbitrary or unlawful detention?” A. The factual background 3. The appellant may be described as a serial over-stayer. He is a Pakistani national and first came to Hong Kong in 1992 using a passport bearing the name “Ghulam Rubbani” and stating his date of birth as 15 April 1971.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo V. FG
    Judgment Summary FACV Nos 5, 6 & 7 of 2010 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NOS 5, 6 & 7 OF 2010 (CIVIL) (ON APPEAL FROM CACV NOS 373 OF 2008 AND 43 OF 2009) _____________________ Between: DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO 1st Appellant CHINA RAILWAY GROUP (HONG KONG) LIMITED 2nd Appellant CHINA RAILWAY RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT 3rd Appellant LIMITED CHINA RAILWAY SINO-CONGO MINING LIMITED 4th Appellant CHINA RAILWAY GROUP LIMITED 5th Appellant SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE 6th Appellant - and - FG HEMISPHERE ASSOCIATES LLC Respondent _____________________ Coram : Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Mr Justice Mortimer NPJ and Sir Anthony Mason NPJ Dates of Hearing : 21-25, 28 & 29 March 2011 Date of Judgment : 8 June 2011 - 2 - J U D G M E N T Mr Justice Bokhary PJ : 1. It has always been known that the day would come when the Court has to give a decision on judicial independence. That day has come. Judicial independence is not to be found in what the courts merely say. It is to be found in what the courts actually do. In other words, it is to be found in what the courts decide. My judgment continues under the following sub-headings :- Paras (1) Core question of law : absolute or restrictive immunity?......... 2 – 5 (2) Facts…………………………………………………………. 6 – 18 (3) Saw J’s ex parte order : enforcement, service and injunctions 19 – 20 (4) Discharged inter partes by Reyes J………………………….. 21 (5) Restored by Court of Appeal subject to a remitter ………….
    [Show full text]
  • Monthly Report HK
    September 2011 in Hong Kong 30.9.2011 / No 93 A condensed press review prepared by the Consulate General of Switzerland in HK Economy + Finance HK in big sell on yuan services: HK Monetary Authority chairman Norman Chan has tried to entice the City of London to co-operate in delivering yuan products and services to Europe. Chan made his appeal at an investment symposium attended by more than 1,700 companies in London. "We believe internationalisation of the yuan will proceed, and it will proceed very quickly. It does not matter whether you are a company or from a bank because there are lots of ways HK can help you to build and develop the off-shore yuan business." Chief Executive Donald Tsang also spoke, encouraging small and medium companies to use HK as a gateway to the mainland and Asia. James Sassoon, commercial secretary to the UK Treasury, said companies must "look East" to sail through the economic slowdown at home and in Europe. Jack So, chairman of the HK Trade Development Council, said the "gloom and doom" in Europe and the US had accelerated the shift of economic power. HK still freest economy, but ranking at risk: HK has again been named the freest economy in the world, but the city could be heading downhill from here on, a Canadian free-market think tank says. For the 33rd consecutive year the city has topped the ranking, but the minimum wage law, the competition law now under debate, and the city's increasing economic ties with the mainland may mean the best is in the past, the Fraser Institute said.
    [Show full text]
  • Secretary of Justice V Yau Yuk Lung Zigo (Court of Final Appeal)
    FACC No. 12 of 2006 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION FINAL APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2006 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPEAL FROM HCMA NO. 107 OF 2006) _____________________ Between: SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE Appellant - and - YAU YUK LUNG ZIGO 1st Respondent LEE KAM CHUEN 2nd Respondent _____________________ Court: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Chan PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ and Sir Anthony Mason NPJ Dates of Hearing: 25 and 26 June 2007 Date of Judgment: 17 July 2007 ______________________ J U D G M E N T ______________________ Chief Justice Li: 1. Equality before the law is a fundamental human right (“the right to equality”). Equality is the antithesis of discrimination. The constitutional right to equality is in essence the right not to be discriminated against. It guarantees protection from discrimination. The right to equality is enshrined in numerous international human rights instruments and is widely embodied in the constitutions of jurisdictions around the world. It is constitutionally protected in Hong Kong. 1 2. Discriminatory law is unfair and violates the human dignity of those discriminated against. It is demeaning for them and generates ill-will and a sense of grievance on their part. It breeds tension and discord in society. 3. The question in this appeal is whether s.118F(1) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200 (“s. 118F(1)”), which criminalises homosexual buggery committed otherwise than in private, is unconstitutional on the ground that it is discriminatory and infringes the constitutional right to equality. The charges 4. The respondents were charged with having committed buggery with each other otherwise than in private, contrary to s.
    [Show full text]
  • Hong Kong Book Catalogue
    2021 Hong Kong July Book Catalogue ENCYCLOPAEDIC WORKS & LOOSELEAF SERVICES Law. In Sync. Title Index Encyclopaedic Works • Atkin's Court Forms Hong Kong • Halsbury's Laws of Hong Kong - Second Edition • The Annotated Ordinances of Hong Kong • The Hong Kong Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents Law Reports • Hong Kong Cases • Hong Kong Conveyancing and Property Reports • Hong Kong Family Law Reports • Hong Kong Public Law Reports Looseleafs • Banking Law: Hong Kong SAR and People's Republic of China • Butterworths Hong Kong Personal Injury Service • Criminal Evidence in Hong Kong • Criminal Procedure: Trial on Indictment • Emden's Construction Law Hong Kong • Encyclopaedia of Hong Kong Taxation • Hong Kong Civil Court Practice • Hong Kong Company Law: Legislation and Commentary • Hong Kong Conveyancing • Hong Kong Corporate Law • Hong Kong Employment Law Manual • Hong Kong Employment Ordinance: An Annotated Guide • Hotten and Ho on Family and Divorce Law in Hong Kong • Intellectual Property in Hong Kong • Securities Law: Hong Kong SAR and People's Republic of China • The Professional Conduct of Lawyers in Hong Kong LexisNexis® Hong Kong - Encyclopaedic Works & Looseleaf Services 2021 Atkin's Court Forms Hong Kong ISBN: Update frequency: 9789628105472 6 issues a year Format: Looseleaf set (10 binders); Lexis Advance® Hong Kong (Online) Scan me for details https://www.lexisnexis.com.hk/ACFHK An unrivalled collection of the main procedural documents required in every civil proceeding before the courts in Hong Kong. Your guide through all the essential stages of proceedings, from pre-action to post-judgment, providing a structured and reliable guide to help you plead with confidence. This essential practical encyclopaedia is the authoritative local version Titles Covered: of the UK encyclopaedic work, fully adapted to the needs of the Hong Kong practitioner.
    [Show full text]