11
A
hur Ruislay
the
Lo writing
Sa that
9
four
后
provide
arme
7-0. t
the sys
The
C
On
рабронед
will instruct.
muft
な
Ca
that the C.J.gH.K
of the Judge of Shanghai will
Тибу
proside, according to seniority of appointment.
The 7.0 says that the arrangement is
in the first instance of the persons &c.
H. Saumarez, but I suppose
can stand.
the matter
Judge
is contained
of the arrangement
와
they will be made. If it isn't the
office will
be Dodder 4/3
на Сож
I conceive
have the repeated.
BY26.
the above minutes, except possibly
to appeals from Wei-hai-Wei, which might, I think, continue to be to the Supreme Court for Hongkong.
I
for Consideration them before the new Court of Appeal (3 judges) Knowing (it's appeals before such and the 2 H.K. judges both of whom will, I suppose, dispose
There is not the same reason
for this as to the courts
is in the opinion of the oftoman
-$58.
77 now) in which Full Court" shall continue to mean the C.J and
in accordance with
P. J.
how to be called the Divisional Court the intention of Sec 4 of this Bill
was however,
secs 14 (2/9/3) infra, which seems to show that there was such provision in the Code as I have suggested
above.
But I should not have thought that both sec 5 and sec 14 (2) of
were necessary
This vests certain appropriate proceedings in the existing Full Court-
in the Divisional Court.
provided as follows:-
The procedure for these appeals
is
for (a) by Sec 13
infra
G
} by subsecs (2) (3) of this Sec 8.
+
(5)
I see no
objection to the section
Preserves the status quo as to appeals from magistrates
This is explained by sec 15 (4) infra, which makes the Shanghai
Judge
member of the Supreme Court of H. Kong.
H.
Secs.
Sec 14/2/967). Vide Supra, under Secs 5.
Luiz and "Ordinance"
Explained by Secs 15(4)
I am not sure that it would not be better to
write to F. Pierotti, to F.O_ I grant that he is hostile to this scheme, but we can discount
hostility, and
I think that his knowledge of
the local laws or practice (which must necessarily be
much greater than ours) may be of use in detecting
errors or omissions
in the tinkering with the Sup.
Court and Civil Procedure Code which
§ is the Divisional Court as defined
sec 15(3.
Sec 15(1)
Sec 15/2/+67
as
there is for
tribunal;
Japan
f
of Wei-hai-Wei appeals to writ
of this course is adopted
Mause contò la added
X
to the off already on the subject and we shall avoid
having to amend the Wei-hai-Wei Ord.
5265. This is obviously, all right so
far as chap XXVIII
is concerned,
of the Code ("Appeals to the Full Court")
and I should have thought, but that the application of
so limited.
this section seems to have been
There may be possible objections
X
Lat
Mere omission of §12 (3)
with amendments
of Sec 7(2)
the Code (which
I have not time to examine extensively great
ausat
appear from my
notes made.
ucinati
on
Secs 5, man quili possible
JR. 2/3
as will
L
b.