4. As I mentioned to your
in the telephone, I have a couple of points on the draft Ordinance
in Hong Kong Telmo 1340 of 16 May. First, in
paragraph there
are
9
of
по
the Schedule, I assume that sub-paragraphs which have
insertion of "(1)"
been omitted, but the
after the numeral "9" might suggest otherwise.
in paragraph 9
Second, in items (B) and (F) of the Schedule, I think that we should specify what "paragraph 3" we are talking about, Le. Whether it is in the Ordinance itself, the
of
a
Schedule,
sub-paragraph of paragraph 9 Third, and most important, we need to be sure whether item (A) of paragraph 9 is inconsistent with paragraph 10. I think that this latter point is one on which Hong Kong should be asked to comment.
5/6/84
C.A. Whomersley Legal Advisers