Making
(b) The Scheme requires a residency period.
the residency period longer than three months would exacerbate the current unsatisfactory position in which many experienced English lawyers, seconded to their firms Hong Kong office, presently find themselves.
(၁)
Note:
Scheme before
certificates.
Lawyers admitted as Hong Kong lawyers under the would have to practise law for two years receiving unconditional practising Although the Scheme allows for a waiver, under the Law Society's current rule the period can only be reduced to one year but cannot be eliminated altogether.
4.
5.
the language requirement.
During its
deliberations
important to
ensure
the
Sub-Committee discussed It decided that it was that lawyers demonstrate proficiency in the English language.
Should the official language
become only Chinese (Cantonese), proficiency in that language would need to be considered as a valid requirement.
The questions relating to the residency requirement and rule regarding unconditional practising
the
certificates fell outside of the mandate of the Sub-Committee.
Some members of the Sub-Committee supported amending the one year rule and retaining the three month residency requirement in all situations. The Sub-Committe as a whole has not formed a view of this matter. Council's determination of this issue is requested.
The Australian Chamber of Commerce's letter dated 29th August 1991
The Chamber was generally supportive. It requested that the examination and exemption procedures provide for reasonable access and not be used as a hidden obstacle to admission. The Sub-Committee noted that
the purpose of the Scheme is to encourage admission and not create barriers.
Letter from the U.S. Firms dated 31st August 1991
The letter
It queried the necessity of requiring foreign lawyers admitted in Hong Kong to practise with a conditional practising certificate for a minimum
period of one year.
The Sub-Committee's view is stated at (3) above.
annexure/1-3
2