CO129-548-12 Supreme Court Amendment Ordinance 1934 24-8-1934 - 5-9-1934 — Page 8

(2)

m13717

(1)

حمن

(-)

13717

द

33

11

(au)

certiorari, habeas corpus and mandamus proceedings, as held

in England at the end of 1930. The date 31st December, 1930,

is fixed upon because the only authoritative text book on

practice and procedure on the revenue side that is available

for reference in Hong Kong was published early in 1931.

previous wording of the proviso - "the practice ... shall be

the practice from time to time for the time being in force in

England" might well make it extremely difficult for the

Crown in any proceeding to satisfy the Court that the practice

adopted was that at the moment in force in England.

the

The

4. The effect of/addition to section 13 of the principal

Ordinance made by section 5 of this Ordinance is to put the

Registrar of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong in the position

of the King's Remembrancer in England for the purpose of pro-

ceedings in the Colony on the revenue side.

5. The other two amendments enacted by this Ordinance are

based on directions from the Secretary of State in his des-

patch No.87 of the 22nd February, 1934, in which he commented

on certain provisions of the Supreme Court Amendment Ordinance,

1933 (No.12 of 1933), which had been submitted to him for the

signification of His Majesty's pleasure.

6. Section 3 of this Ordinance substitutes for section 9(2)

(as enacted by section 2 of Ordinance No.12 of 1933) of the

principal Ordinance a revised sub-section in which the words

suggested by the Secretary of State "subject to any conditions

contained in any regulation made by or under the authority of

His Majesty for His Majesty's Colonial Service" are substituted

for the words "subject to suspension by the Governor in like

manner as other officers in the Colony".

7. Section 4 of this Ordinance substi tu tes for section 11

(as enacted by section 2 of Ordinance No.12 of 1933) of the

principal Ordinance a revised section which follows the wording

suggested by the Secretary of State, omitting only the words

"without the consent of the Governor". To these words the

Unofficial Members of the Executive Council took exception on

8

q

the ground that they might, if retained, leave the door open

the possible)

to infringement of the common law principle that an English

judge cannot in general hold at the same time both his judgship

and some other post or position, not authorised by law, from

which he derives or can derive profit or emolument.

8.

In my opinion this is an Ordinance to which His Excellency

the Governor may properly assent in the name of His Majesty

and on His behalf.

Rohibell

Attorney General.

Pa

Pa

1/4299/1929.

Sir,

Enclosure No.3

25th May, 1934.

With reference to the Bill intituled

an Ordinance to amend the Supreme Court Ordinance,

1873, a copy of which is attached, I have the

honour to inform Your Honour that certain doubts

have arisen as to the advisability of retaining

the words "without the consent of the Governor" in

section 11 as proposed to be enacted by Clause

thereof.

It has been suggested not only that a

question of departure from established constitutional

principles appears to be involved, but also that the

effect of these words is to throw on a Governor an

onus which it is undesirable that he should be called

upon to bear.

I understand that the Attorney General has

already had some discussion with Your Honour on the

point, and in these circumstances I should much

appreciate an expression of your views.

I have the honour to be,

Sir,

Your Honour's most obedient servant,

His Honour

The Chief Justice,

Hong Kong.

(Sgd.) W. PEEL.

Governor, &c.

10

10

10Page 11