CO129-459 - Individuals - 1919 — Page 86

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

**

Record .99.

32.

84

authorised by reason of the Prison Ordinance 1899

and the regulations made under that Ordinance (the

material parts of such Ordinance are set out in the Appendix

to the Respondents' Case)

On the 12th June judgment was given by the Court discussing

the action. The learned Judges held that the proceedings

had been in accordance with the Deportation Ordinance. They

further held that the Deportation Ordinance was valid.

With respect to the Appellant's claim for assault they held that

the acts complained of did not constitute an assault and

also that they were authorised under the Prison Ordinance

1899 and the Prison Regulations. The reasons of the learned

Judges will be found set out at pages 99 to 126 of the

Record.

35.

Against this decision the present appeal is being preferred.

34.

The Respondents humbly submit that the said Appeal should

be dismissed for the following

REASONS

1.

BECAUSE the Deportation Ordinance 1917 was a valid

Ordinance duly enacted.

2.

BECAUSE the proceedings of the Respondents were duly

taken under the said Ordinance.

Edit History

2026-06-14 06:03:05 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
**Record .99.32.84authorised by reason of the Prison Ordinance 1899and the regulations made under that Ordinance (thematerial parts of such Ordinance are set out in the Appendixto the Respondents' Case)On the 12th June judgment was given by the Court discussingthe action. The learned Judges held that the proceedingshad been in accordance with the Deportation Ordinance. Theyfurther held that the Deportation Ordinance was valid.With respect to the Appellant's claim for assault they held thatthe acts complained of did not constitute an assault andalso that they were authorised under the Prison Ordinance1899 and the Prison Regulations. The reasons of the learnedJudges will be found set out at pages 99 to 126 of theRecord.35.Against this decision the present appeal is being preferred.34.The Respondents humbly submit that the said Appeal shouldbe dismissed for the followingREASONS1.BECAUSE the Deportation Ordinance 1917 was a validOrdinance duly enacted.2.BECAUSE the proceedings of the Respondents were dulytaken under the said Ordinance.
Baseline (Original)
p. p**ecord .99.32.84authorised by reason of the prison Ordinance 19991899)and the regulations made under that Ordinance (thematerial parts of such Urdinance are set out in the Appendi #to the Respondents Case)On the 12th June judgment was given by the Court discusg=ingthe action. The learned Judges held that the proceedingshad been in accordance with the Deportation Ordinance. Theymy thyfurther held that the Deportation Ordinance was valid. respect to the Appellant's claim for assault they held thatthe acts complained of did not constitute ar assault andalso that they were authorised under the Prison Ordinance1899 and the Prison Regulations. The reasons of the learned_Judges will be found set out at pages 99 to 126 of theHecord.35.Against this decision the present appeal is being preferre34.The Respondente humbly submit that the said Appeal shouldbe disgrased for the followingREASONS1.BECAUSE the Deportation Ordinance 1917 was a validOrdinance duly enacted.2.BECAUSE the proceedings of the Respondents were dulytaken under the said ürdinance.
2026-06-14 06:03:05 · Baseline
View content

p. p

**

ecord .99.

32.

84

authorised by reason of the prison Ordinance 1999

1899) and the regulations made under that Ordinance (the

material parts of such Urdinance are set out in the Appendi #

to the Respondents Case)

On the 12th June judgment was given by the Court discusg=

ing the action. The learned Judges held that the proceedings

had been in accordance with the Deportation Ordinance. They

my thy

further held that the Deportation Ordinance was valid.

respect to the Appellant's claim for assault they held that

the acts complained of did not constitute ar assault and

also that they were authorised under the Prison Ordinance

1899 and the Prison Regulations. The reasons of the learned_

Judges will be found set out at pages 99 to 126 of the

Hecord.

35.

Against this decision the present appeal is being preferre

34.

The Respondente humbly submit that the said Appeal should

be disgrased for the following

REASONS

1.

BECAUSE the Deportation Ordinance 1917 was a valid

Ordinance duly enacted.

2.

BECAUSE the proceedings of the Respondents were duly

taken under the said ürdinance.

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.