WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 1985
MR #CNG ADDED UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS IN GENERAL SHARED THE ADMINISTRATION'S VIEW THAT BASIC PRINCIPLES HAD NOT BEEN INFRINGED.
AN AMENDMENT TO ENABLE THE REOPENING OF MARINE INQUIRY PROCEEDINGS DID NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OR CHARACTER OF ANYTHING THAT HAD OCCURRED, NOR DID IT IMPAIR EXISTING RIGHTS OR OBLIGATIONS, HE OBSERVED.
NOTING THAT THE ESSENCE OF THE AMENDMENT WAS PROCEDURAL, HE SAID IT WAS TO CLARIFY WHAT WAS PERCEIVED TO BE A PRESENT ILLOGICAL DEFECT IN ESTABLISHED REHEARING PROVISIONS RELATING TO HONG KONG MARINE INQUIRIES.
+WE ACCEPT THAT THE APPLICATION OF THE AMENDMENT TO PAST AS WELL AS FUTURE HEARINGS IS, IN FACT, CONSISTENT WITH ANOTHER IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE, THAT JUSTICE SHOULD BE DONE BETWEEN THE PARTIES,+ HE SAID.
HE MENTIONED THAT SINCE CLAUSE 2(B) INVOLVED IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES OF LAW, THE ATTENTION OF BOTH THE BAR ASSOCIATION AND THE LAW SOCIETY HAD BEEN DRAWN TO THE RETROSPECTIVE ASPECT OF THE BILL.
MOVING THE COMMITTEE STAGE AND THIRD READING OF THE BILL, THE SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES, THE HON GERRY HIGGINSON, SAID THAT THE ISSUES WHICH MR WONG HAD REFERRED TO HAD BEEN SUBJECT TO DETAILED DELIBERATION WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION AND BETWEEN THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE UMELCO GROUP CHAIRED BY MR WONG.
THANKING MR WONG AND HIS COLLEAGUES FOR THE TIME AND TROUBLE TAKEN TO EXAMINE THE LEGISLATION, AND FOR HIS SUPPORT FOR THE MOTION, MR HIGGINSON SAID THAT THESE DELIBERATIONS +HAVE FURTHER CONFIRMED OUR VIEW THAT THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS BOTH NECESSARY AND DESIRABLE+.
0
-
BILL CONFIRMS POWERS OF THE COURTS
*****
THE SUPREME COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1985, WHICH SEEKS TO CONFIRM THE POWERS OF THE COURTS IN THE AREA OF THE LAW CONCERNED WITH JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE, WAS READ THE SECOND TIME TODAY (WEDNESDAY).
MOVING ITS SECOND READING IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE HON JEREMY MATHEWS, SAID THE BILL INCLUDED PROVISIONS ENABLING THE COURTS TO PREVENT THE DISAPPEARANCE OF ASSETS AND THE DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE.
THESE NEW FORMS OF JUDICIAL REMEDY WERE GIVEN STATUTORY RECOGNITION IN ENGLAND BY THE SUPREME COURT ACT 1981, HE SAID, CITING THE +MAREVA+ AND +ANTON PILLER+ CASES IN WHICH THE COURTS USED IN A NOVEL WAY+ THE POWER TO PREVENT THE DESTRUCTION OF THE OBJECTS ABOUT WHICH PARTIES WERE CONTESTING.
THE ATTORNEY