Reference...
1. I would be content with Mr Rushford's reply, which seems to me to give a very fair wind to the idea floated by Sir D Roberts.
2.
Incidentally, I should have thought that we would all deprecate suggestions of malice, particularly among colleagues, which are unsubstantiated (and which in this case, I am quite sure, could not be substantiated).
J R Freeland
Second Legal Adviser
CODE 18 - 77
T
28 November 1978
In the haren
We discussed. You suggested that
us
you night consult S.; D. Roberts, to discover whether he envisaged his idea as something that was dearable any way, or simply something that might be resorted to if all else failed (i.e. after trying the Hong Kong bar, the colonial judiciary, the English bar etc.).
2. Ihr Rushford's draft now begins by putting the points in favor of the proposal quite convincingly, but then from para 7 onwards seems to lose its force, mainly I think because it is based on the assumption that the device of seconding English High Cout Judges to Hong Kong is only to be resorted to if all else fails (and, plainly, all else has not yet failed). Subject to what Sir D. Roberts may tell you, I would have thought that the proposal was already worth pussing, even though other sources have not dried up, as a way of improving the quality of the Hong Kong
beach.
3. I am still not contvinced that there really we
"formidable