3
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1989
TURNING TO THE MAIN PROVISIONS OF THE BILL, SIR PIERS SAID CLAUSE 3 WHICH SOUGHT TO AMEND SECTION 19 OF THE PRINCIPAL ORDINANCE, PROVIDED FOR THE EXEMPTION OF STOCK BORROWING AND STOCK RETURN FROM STAMP DUTY AND SET FORTH THE CONTROLS AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK NECESSARY TO MAKE THE SYSTEM WORK.
TO
TO
CLAUSE 4 SOUGHT TO ADD A NEW SECTION 58A, WHICH WOULD AFFORD ANY PERSON, AGAINST WHOM THE COLLECTOR OF STAMP REVENUE INTENDED INVOKE CIVIL SANCTIONS, AN OPPORTUNITY OF GIVING AN EXPLANATION THE COLLECTOR AS TO WHY SUCH ACTION SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN.
KONG,
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY SAID THE STOCK EXCHANGE OF HONG THE SECURITIES AND FUTURES COMMISSION AND THE JOINT LIAISON COMMITTEE ON TAXATION HAD BEEN CONSULTED, AND HAD ENDORSED THE PROPOSALS.
"THE FULL YEAR COST TO THE REVENUE IN 1990-91 OF IMPLEMENTING THESE PROPOSALS HAS BEEN ESTIMATED TO BB SOME $40 MILLION, HE ADDED.
DEBATE ON THE BILL WAS ADJOURNED.
ACTING AG REPLIES TO CRITICISM OF TRUSTS BILL
GENERAL, THE HON FRANK
STOCK. GAVE A
(WEDNESDAY)
ΤΟ
THE ACTING ATTORNEY POINT-BY-POINT REPLY IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY CRITICISMS MADE BY THE HON PETER H.Y. WONG AGAINST THE RECOGNITION TRUSTS BILL 1989.
OF
MR STOCK SAID IN THE RESUMED DEBATE ON THE BILL THAT IT HAD FIRST BEEN CONTENDED THAT IN A COMMON LAW JURISDICTION WITH RULES OF EQUITY, THERE WAS NO NEED FOR THE HAGUE CONVENTION. IT WAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IN JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT COURTS OF EQUITY, THE CONVENTION WOULD NOT ASSIST.
"I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF I WERE то REMIND MEMBERS OF THE PURPOSE OF THE CONVENTION AND OF THIS BILL BY QUOTING THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF GREAT BRITAIN WHEN HE MOVED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS THE SECOND READING OF THE BILL FOR THE RECOGNITION OF TRUSTS ACT 1987, WHICH IS LARGELY IN THE SAME TERMS AS THE BILL NOW BEFORE US," НЕ SAID.
HE QUOTED:
***THE PURPOSE OF THE CONVENTION JS TO ESTABLISH COMMON
PRINCIPLES BETWEEN STATES ON THE LAW OF TRUSTS AND TO DEAL WITH THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES CONCERNING THEIR RECOGNITION.
TRUSTS ARE NOT, IN GENERAL, A CONCEPT FAMILIAR TO CIVIL LAW COUNTRIES. THEIR SYSTEMS OF LAW ARE NOT DESIGNED TO ACCEPT THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL MAY HOLD ASSETS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER. TO GIVE AN EXTREME EXAMPLE, AT PRESENT IF THERE ARE TRUST ASSETS IN A FOREIGN CIVIL LAW JURISDICTION, AND THE TRUSTEE INCURS DEBTS IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY, THE ASSETS OF THE TRUST ARE LIABLE TO BE SEIZED TO MEET THE DEBTS INCURRED BY THE TRUSTEE.
/"IT WAS