-
· 9 -
Lu Ping:
AG:
the two areas where there is a restriction
on the power of the Hong Kong Legislature
to make law. The example raised
by Mr Shao involves different considera-
tions. In that example there is no question of repugnancy in the sense we have been describing.
The gist of the question is whether the decision of the Court is only applicable to the particular driver.
In that example there will be two
consequences. First, the driver
who successfully challenges that law, if he paid the higher charge, would be entitled to recover it.
The second consequence is that all others who have been unwrongfully charged that tax too could claim
back the tax.
Lu Ping:
AG:
Let us assume that the increase
is from $5 to $10. All other drivers
have paid the $10. Could they get their refund without applying to court? When people pass through the tunnel in future will they be
charged $5 or $10?
The court having declared the law to be illegal the Government cannot collect that higher tax. I can
give a concrete example of how it works in practice. This did not happen in Hong Kong but in the UK.
In 1976, the British Government
announced that it would increase the fee for a T.V. licence, say
from £20 to 30. That announcement
was made in Parliament.
Immediately
/....10