TNAG-0193-FCO40-229-Representations-from-Hong-Kong-Bar-Association-particularly--1970 — Page 79

RESTRICTED.

RESTRICTED

16/941.

↑

Note of a meeting between the Bar Committee and Mr. J. C. McPetrie on Friday, 27th and Monday, 30th November, 1964, at the Legal Department.

The Bar Committee gave Mr. McPetrie a copy of a memorandun setting out the points which they wished to discuss. (The references in

this note are to the paragraphs of that memorandun, which is attached to this note as Annex 1.)

They said that they had considered whether their discussion with

Mr. McPetrio should be confidential, but had come to the conclusion that

that would detract from the usefulness of the discussion.

It was thereforu

agreed that Mr. McPetrie would be free to bring the points made by the Bar Committee to the notice of the appropriate authorities in Hong Kong

or in London.

1+2

Mr. McPetric said that ho was primarily concerned to listen to

He did not think that the Bar Committeo what the Bar Committeo had to say. would expect him to give decisions, and it might be that on nost points

he would refrain from expressing a firu opinion.

Para. 1. JUDICIARY.

Appointments of Puisno Judges fron District Court Bench.

The Bar Committee said that some recent acting appointments (say ever the las: two years) to the Supreme Court Bench had not had the confidence of the Bar. These had been acting appointments from the Distr. : Court. The Connittee asked whether it would be possible for the Chief Justice to consult informally with the President of the Bar Association and such other nenbers of the Bar (if any) as the Chief Justice thought fit before appointments to the Supreme Court Bench (whether acting or substantive) were nade in future. They thought that the practising Ber was in a better position than the Chief Justice to assess the ability of a District Court judge to conduct the proceedings of his court in a satisfactory and expeditious nanner. They pointed out that the Chief Justico saw a District Court judge in action only when the latter was acting as a Puisne Judge and was sitting with the Chief Justice on an appeal. Mr. McPetrie said that the Committee's request would be considered but pointed out that there might be difficulties of principlo

RESTRICTED