COPY.
Confidential.
Your Excellency,
C O
4'7
11965
Rece
REGP 12 APR 11
As to the suggestion of the Secretary of
State to abolish altogether the intermediate Court of Appeal as at
present constituted and to allow appeals to lie direct from the
Supreme Court of Hongkong to the Privy Council I do not think such
a suggestion is feasible. The cost of such appeals would as the
Secretary of State points out be "a serious obstacle and liti-
-gants at the present time are often debarred from going to the
Privy Council on the ground of the cost involved.
2.
The Secretary of State says that the suggested
procedure would presumably involve the hearing of the less diffi-
-cult cases by one Judge, as at present, and the more complex cases
before the Full Court of two Judges. By this I understand him to
imply that one Judge would as at present try trivial cases in which
an appeal is unlikely to lie and that in the more important cases
when an appeal may be probable the two Judges would sit in Origin-
-al Jurisdiction to try them. Such a proposal in my opinion is im-
-practicable and would bring the work of the Courts to a deadlock.
The cases tried here in Original Jurisdiction before the Chief
Justice are often lengthy and complex and frequently occupy several
days. I can cite instances within my experience of the Colony where
the hearing of important cases has lasted 54, 12 and 16 days
respectively (the appeal before the Full Court in the 54 days
case
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.