፣
Repert
0
392
1
387
妻
i
"An Ordinance (No.39 of 1912) to amend the Full Court Ordi-
Parce 1912".
1. Representatiens were made by several preminent lawyers
that it was possible that the Full Court Ordinance 1912 did
not sufficiently clearly indicate what was to be the fate
of pending appeals;t
;that is tẽ say of appeals brought er made
but met heard before the date of the coming int● ●peration of
considered the Full Court Ordinance 1912. Although it was net but
that there could met be much doubt that such appeals would be
triable before the Full Court as constituted under the Ordi-
nance it was thought desirable that any such anxiety should
be allayed and this has been done by section 3 of the present
Ordinance which substantively declares the tribunal to which
such appeals shall r*.
2. Opportunity was also taken at the same time of clear-
ing the lanṛuage of section 5 of the Full Court Ordinance 1912,
It was thought by some that the wards "and also whenever the
Government hy Notification in the Gazette se directs" were
not clearly disjunctive from the words "when 3 Judres in the
permanent service of the Colony shall not be available". It
was intended that the twe phrases should be disjunctive and
the latter of the two was inserted at the suggestion and re-
quest of Sir Havilland de Saumarez whe thought that it might
be possibl● that even when and if there were 3 permanent Su-
preme Court Judges in this Colony one might be not available
for some reason and consequently that it still might be de-
sirable that the services of a Judge from His Majesty's Su-
rreme Court of China could be requisitioned.
*
Section 2 of the present Ordimar ce clears up this possible ambiguity.
"
33)