The matter in question relates to the decision taken regarding the execution of certain scams that are considered bad.
An objection was raised, and it was decided that the Canton decision is mainly taken judicially on the fact that the execution of the scams was bad.
The Court is to show cause, and if they show cause to the satisfaction of the Court, they will not be struck off.
As regards the first point, there is a practical difficulty in satisfying itself (as mentioned in the Couch) as to the criminal laws of certain countries, including Germany, France, Holland, and Portugal.
I see nothing improper in saying that we will not allow a company to register if it incites to commit offences within the jurisdiction.
Personally, I am more doubtful about punishing such incitement and deprecating it.
As to the second point, I don't understand why it is for the Executive to satisfy itself before moving the Court to decide.
The wording of our former letter was considered, and it was suggested that it gave sufficient direction to the Court.
The offence for which the penalty of striking off the register is imposed is to be specific.
I agree with the view that the decision is mainly with the Attorney General, who prosecutes.
I also agree with them on the first point: if there are counter-suggestions, we will welcome them.
Page 312
GR1615
16/5
The text appears to be a discussion among officials regarding the registration of companies and the jurisdiction of the courts in Hong Kong. The conversation revolves around the decision to strike off a company's registration due to its alleged involvement in inciting crimes within the jurisdiction.
The original text has been reordered and reformatted to improve readability and coherence.
GBC1615
للسما
country in published
Whittie
mattor in
312
objection
The food that the decisin is to
taken of the exccuting scams bad
The
(as
h
Kue
ий бирки
Caval
are
to shew cause
Cant. if they skew
lofre
to the satisfaction of the Court they will not be struck off & therefore the cant decision is mally taken Ga Judicial
o the fact that the
the Etxautin.
Initiual
prave
MYYYYY
for dron't affect the mattor.
Viao
I and put these pants of
81
7615.
As regards the fist point,
piring effect & the
it Clean Com
practical difficulty in
me that than we be a
70. engges
hight Lat
The H.K. Jod
Laverts (Radi
Satisfy itself (Month in the Couch)
as o the criminal laws of Cepten, fermany,
Cegler, fermany, France, Holland,
Porta papan. I see nothing wimproper
O
saging that we
will not allow
A
يسي
im
Compart register if it incites to minde
t
jurisdiction, to the come in ion quito che indritath offences within the jurisdiction: though
k for Viduation
personally I am
more doubtful
Any
G
punishing such incitement & fine
deprecaturation.
Do.
весно
As the second point, I don't understand
is for the Excentive
Naturally it is
امی
the
to satisfy itself before moving the (mat, t it in for the (unt decide. But wording of our former letter
Cans hom
for angle rained on to the power of the Camb
Orda drapreta
Wames
we suggested give sufficiens direction to
The Cunt any
15the offence for which the
penalty of striking iffy the register in the minposed?
Me Lucas
16/5
As to the last party
hode
7
minute, I think there wo be sufficient direction, the for wobe charged with having incites the comme in Chiria of an offence" to wit "munder.
д and the offence we have to be specific. Jagree wilt her stuble reludiode that the decision is most with the Algin Executive who prosecute but the (t. "C" "pon this to F. Inste
Jagree with them also on the first have if the at mee
counter suffections, we will welcome them
GBC 1615
fr jom
any
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.