not
5. The second modification proposed at (1) to the White Paper proposals appears to relate to the manner in which dissolution of a marriage by mutual consent may be effected. I have no comments on the observations contained in paragraphs 15 and 16 of (1).
6.
Perhaps I ought to mention that in connection with the Indyka group of cases the circumstance that the ground for divorce ise
one recognised in England does not matter so long as the ground in question does not offend against natural justice. (Manning v. Manning (1958) I A.E.R. page 291).
I. H Cruchley
(I. H. Cruchley)
26th November 1968
Room 44/4, FCO Downing Street (West)
(Main B, Ext. 1201)
F
Mr. Stewart
In view of Mr. Cruchley's minute above it is clear that the risk mentioned in para. 3 of the saving despatch has not lessened to the extent that Hong Kong think. Nevertheless if they wish to proceed we have no legal objection.
2.
The proposals generally were approved by a Minister (Mrs. White) in her minute of 3 FED 574/402/01/arch 1966. It had been pointed out to Mrs.
White in paragraph 9 of the submission to her that the effect would be go give some people a status in Hong Kong, i.e. married or single which could be peculiar to Hong Kong but she accepted that there would be anomalies "in any Transitional period"
а
3. The present proposal is that when the legal system of a country provides for the Chinese modern marriage and personв xxx contract such a marriage in such a country whether before or after "the appointed date" that marriage shall be capable of being dissolved by mutual consent provided that both spouses can show that on the date of the divorce there existed a real and substantial connection between the two parties and Hong Kong. If English law does not develop any further along the road to recognition of such dissolutions then the anomalies will not be purely transitional.
4.
I suggest that we should now put Mr. Cruchley's views to Hong Kong. If they still wish to proceed, on the basis that the benefit to the people of Hong Kong outweighs the risk of anomalies, they x then they would I think be justified in doing so but consideration would need to be given to going to Ministers again for a decision.
Norman A. Smith
N.A.SMITH
10 December 1968
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.