TNAG-0992-FCO40-1211-Policy-on-salaries-and-pensions-for-civil-service-in-Hong-Ko-1980 — Page 62

17

To say that the

2

Governor is the authority for their

interpretation can be said to mean, in theory, that the Governor can construe a Regulation in any way which he thinks fit, though in practice he would be unlikely to do this in a wholly unreasonable

way.

Such a provision may weaken the reliance which a public officer can place on G.Rs, but does not strike at their nature. The reference to having "no force in law" appears to be no more than an indication, to persons unfamiliar with the niceties of legislation, in its many disguises, that these regulations are

not legislative in effect.

We conclude that there is an intention on both sides

to enter a binding contract. The public officer does so without

reservation. The Crown also intends to enter a contract by

which the officer shall be bound but not itself, though the

appointee is not warned of the lop-sided nature of the contract,

as seen by the Crown. There is no hint that he must keep his promises, but that the Crown need not.

We decide that there is a contract between the CroWN

and its servants and that its terms should be, and are, mutually

enforceable, even though this contract contains one anomalous provision (the power of dismissal at pleasure) which overrides the contract and, if used, effectively negates the usual

relationship of employer and employee. Col. Regs. do not form

part of that contract.

An important difficulty remains. What terms and

conditions form part of the contract?

As indicated above, an appointee receives a letter of

offer to which is attached a memorandum of conditions of service,

This memorandum will contain a clause, which informs the officer

that he is subject to G.Rs, Departmental Instructions and Col.

Regs.

There is no difficulty in finding that the contents

of the letter of appointment and the memorandum form part of

the contract. But do all the G.Rs and other instruments to

A. A