TNAG-1517-FCO40-2078-Future-of-Hong-Kong-localisation-of-civil-aviation-legislati-1986 — Page 48

Mr Bedford,

prinformation)(.

M~

Mi wa

mith

Mikli 180/2...

1

have spoken to

INDG

23 JUN 136

HONG KONG : LOCALISATION OF LAWS

19

Mr Barton

pare 2-6. He is chasing the Shi

Dine toate fo

2015

Shipping

reply. the drift to Has yo

PAUL FIFOOT. their count anch

DEPUTY LEGAL ADVISER them of th

1 will

FROM

DATE

ATE: 20 MAY 1986

cc: Mr Barton, HKD

date for

laying of the

مهدي

Avall. 12/5/60

1. I attach a draft of an Order in Council under paragraph 3 of the Schedule to the Hong Kong Act 1985.

2.

So far as civil aviation and merchant shipping generally are concerned, the Order is straightforward. However, although the civil aviation authorities are content that we should go ahead,

sure that we have yet persuaded the Shipping Directorate in the Ministry of Transport. I drafted part of a letter to them some months ago. Has there been any reply? We will be getting into timing difficulties very soon.

3.

Hong Kong telegram number 1479 raises an additional item, namely the repeal of the current Admiralty Jurisdiction Order. is one of the things that I have been afraid of, namely that we should be asked to deal with snippets at frequent intervals.

This

4. Accordingly, if we are going to deal with this new thought, I would like to deal with it generally in the terms of the first square bracket in Clause 2(1) of the draft and to omit Clause 2(2). For one thing, unlike Hong Kong telegram number 1479, I believe that there is an extra territorial effect to the present Admiralty Jurisdiction Order. Section 2(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act provides that a colonial court of admiralty should have the jurisdiction described in Section 2(2) of that Act. That jurisdiction includes extra territorial jurisdiction (i.e. the court may exercise its powers in respect of acts taking place outside the jurisdiction). The current 1985 Order substitutes a reference to the Supreme Court Act 1981 for the jurisdiction set out in Section 2(2) of the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act. The relevant sections of the Supreme Court Act also describe jurisdiction and include

extra territorial

jurisdiction. To be on the safe side, therefore, I think that, if we are to accede to Hong Kong's request at this stage, we should do so both in relation to the power to amend or repeal and in relation to the power to make laws having extra territorial operation.

5. I have, however, drafted in two alternatives in Clause 2(2). Both alternatives would confine the draft to repeal or amendment. The first alternative would be applicable in relation to any enactment relating to admiralty jurisdiction. The second would relate only to the particular 1985 Order. I would be very much against using the latter form since it will only encourage future requests for particular measures rather than broad categories of enactments.

/6...