CO129-459 - Individuals - 1919 — Page 85

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

29. charges of misconduct but did not include the third.

83 In the action the Appellant contended that the proceedings throughout were wrongful and ultra vires for a number of reasons which will be found set out in para.15 of the Statement of Claim and alleged that the proceedings were not justified by the Deportation Ordinance. Alternatively it was contended for the Appellant that the Deportation Ordinance was ultra vires of the legislature. In either event it was contended that the deportation order was invalid.

The Appellant further contended that the taking of his fingerprints and his physical examination in Victoria Gaol constituted an illegal assault.

For the Respondents it was contended that certain of the Appellant's complaints were not supported by the facts. It was further contended that the Deportation Ordinance was validly passed: that the proceedings were duly authorised proceedings under the Ordinance and that the deportation order was valid.

With regard to the Appellant's claim for assault it was contended for the Respondents that the facts proved or admitted did not in law constitute an assault. It was further contended that the acts complained of were duly authorised.

30.

51.

Edit History

2026-06-14 06:03:00 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

7.29. charges of misconduct but did not include the third.83 In the action the Appellant contended that the proceedings throughout were wrongful and ultra vires for a number of reasons which will be found set out in para.15 of the Statement of Claim and alleged that the proceedings were not justified by the Deportation Ordinance. Alternatively it was contended for the Appellant that the Deportation Ordinance was ultra vires of the legislature. In either event it was contended that the deportation order was invalid.The Appellant further contended that the taking of his fingerprints and his physical examination in Victoria Gaol constituted an illegal assault.For the Respondents it was contended that certain of the Appellant's complaints were not supported by the facts. It was further contended that the Deportation Ordinance was validly passed: that the proceedings were duly authorised proceedings under the Ordinance and that the deportation order was valid.With regard to the Appellant's claim for assault it was contended for the Respondents that the facts proved or admitted did not in law constitute an assault. It was further contended that the acts complained of were duly authorised.30.51.14

Baseline (Original)

cord7.29. charges of misconduct but did not include the third.83 In the action the Appellant contended that the proceedings throughout were wrongful and ultra vires for a nember of reasons which will be found set out in para.15 of the 30.51.Statement of Olaim and alleged that the proceedings were notjustified by the Deportation Ordinance. Alternatively it wascontended for the Appellant that the Deportation Ordinancewas ultra vires of the legislature. In either event it wascontended that the deportation order was invalid.TheAppellant further contended that the taking of his fingerprints and his physical examination in Victoria Gaolconstituted an illegal asault.For the Respondents it was contended that certain of theAppellant's complaints were not suported by the facts. Itwas further contended that the Deportation Ordinance wasvalidly passed: that the proceedings were duly autkrisedproceedings under the Ordinance and that the demortationorder was valid.With regard to the Appellant's claim for asasult it wascontended for the Respondents that the facts roved oradmitted did not in law constitute an assault.It wasfurther contended that the acts complained of were duly14

2026-06-14 06:03:00 · Baseline

View content

cord

29.

charges of misconduct but did not include the third.

In the action the Appellant contended that the proceedings

throughout were wrongful and ultra vires for a nember of

reasons which will be found set out in para.15 of the

30.

51.

Statement of Olaim and alleged that the proceedings were not

justified by the Deportation Ordinance. Alternatively it was

contended for the Appellant that the Deportation Ordinance

was ultra vires of the legislature. In either event it was

contended that the deportation order was invalid.

The

Appellant further contended that the taking of his finger

prints and his physical examination in Victoria Gaol

constituted an illegal asault.

For the Respondents it was contended that certain of the

Appellant's complaints were not suported by the facts. It

was further contended that the Deportation Ordinance was

validly passed: that the proceedings were duly autkrised

proceedings under the Ordinance and that the demortation

order was valid.

With regard to the Appellant's claim for asasult it was

contended for the Respondents that the facts roved or

admitted did not in law constitute an assault.

It was

further contended that the acts complained of were duly

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.