boundaries of the clearance area to include the structures. The Director of Housing then awarded an ex-gratia allowance to the operator and offered his staff public housing accommodation.
Appeal for Postponement of Repayment of Student Loans (C 832/85)
The appellant appealed to UMELCO for deferment in the repayment of Government loans granted to his elder brother who was studying in the UK. According to the appellant, in 1981 his brother obtained a loan from the Government for his studies for a first degree. Since early 1984, the Treasury had been sending letters to his brother demanding repayment of this loan by quarterly instalments. His brother had not repaid any amount and the outstanding sum had accumulated considerably. The Treasury had also warned his brother that if he failed to repay the instalments, he would be liable to pay the full amount of the outstanding loan immediately.
The appellant stated that as his brother was still pursuing his studies, it was not possible for him to make any repayment. Their father was suffering from cancer and their mother had to stay at home to take care of him. Moreover, the appellant and his younger sister were still at school. Only his elder sister was employed with a small monthly income. The family was therefore unable to repay the loan at the present time.
The appeal was taken up with the Secretary, University and Polytechnic Grants Committee. Following a review of the case and an interview of the appellant's family, the Secretary, University and Polytechnic Grants Committee agreed to defer repayment of the loan until November 1985 when the brother would have completed his studies.
Appeal for Compensation for Loss in Business (C 840/85)
The operator of a refreshment kiosk at a public park appealed to UMELCO for compensation in respect of the loss in his business.
The operator claimed that he had made a successful bid to the Urban Council to operate the kiosk for a term of three years. However, shortly after the commencement of the tenancy, a major part of the park was closed to facilitate an electrical wiring project. Much to his dismay, the works area was later extended to cover the
sitting-out area immediately in front of the kiosk. As a result of the closure and the works, the park became deserted. Being deprived of patrons, the operator suffered grave business loss. He was aggrieved that in offering the kiosk for letting, the authorities concerned had made no mention of
the fact that almost the whole of the park would be closed for project works shortly after the commencement of the tenancy.
The matter was taken up with the Director of Urban Services, who decided to seek compensation from the contractor of the project. Finally, compensation in the amount of about $35,000 was paid to the operator who was further given the option of terminating the tenancy agreement prematurely, without any loss of tenancy deposit. He subsequently exercised this option.
Assistance/Advice given
Appeal against the Establishment of a Public Billiard Saloon in a Private Residential Estate on Tsing Yi Island (C 2343/84)
The residents of a private residental estate on Tsing Yi Island appealed to UMELCO against the proposed establishment of a public billiard saloon in their estate. At a meeting with the duty roster Members of UMELCO, the representatives of the residents claimed that their estate was a secluded private residential development and that the proposed public billiard saloon was not a facility which the residents themselves would use. According to them, the proposed saloon would attract undesirable elements and pose a security problem to their estate. The tranquility they enjoyed would also be adversely affected. They also alleged that they had had bitter experience with the setting up of an electronic games centre in their estate. Since the opening of the centre, law and order had allegedly deteriorated rapidly. As they had found out that Government had given agreement in principle to issue a licence for the public billiard saloon, they therefore appealed to UMELCO.
The case was taken up with the Secretary for District Administration and the Director of Urban Services. The matter was also discussed at a full meeting of UMELCO. Subsequently, one of the duty roster Members concerned raised a question in the Legislative Council.
After considering the case, the Attorney General advised that, notwithstanding Government's previous agreement in principle to issue a licence, it was still open to the Director of Urban Services to refuse the licence. Accordingly, the matter was re-examined in depth by the Director of Urban Services. Among other things, the Director personally conducted a number of visits to the estate including a night survey of noise, traffic and pedestrian movement in that estate. A number of visits was also paid to public billiard saloons in Hong Kong and Kowloon to acquire a deeper understanding of the actual operation of these establishments. In addition, the Commissioner of Police was consulted on the incidence of crime connected with public billiard saloons. It was established from police records that there was no evidence to suggest that the clientele of these establishments were abnormally prone to crime. The Commissioner pointed out that the saloon, if licensed, would be open to his officers, and would therefore be properly policed. The Commissioner also assured that though the proposed public billiard saloon in the estate was likely to be attractive to young people, no special difficulties were envisaged in dealing with any incidents which might arise at or around the premises. Having carefully considered all the representations and assessed the issues involved, the Director of Urban Services decided that he would not, as Licensing Authority under the Places of Amusement (New Territories) Regulations, be justified in refusing the grant of a public billiard saloon licence in respect of the premises in question. Nevertheless, in view of the possible excessive noise which might be generated by the arrival and departure of patrons and their transport late at night, a special condition of licensing was imposed to the effect that the saloon should be closed at mid-night every night.
The decision of the Director of Urban Services was carefully considered by the duty roster Members. In the light of the existing legislation and procedures and in view of the thorough steps taken by the Licensing Authority in considering this particular application, Members decided that the matter should not be pursued further. The representatives of the residents were advised of Members' decision. They were assured
70