TNAG-1580-FCO40-2154-Extension-to-Hong-Kong-of-European-Community--European-Free-1987 — Page 29

3

Convention (in fact this was opposed only by Greece). Greece maintained its attachment to Article 52 (3) but could accept its

deletion in respect of married women. France reminded the

meeting that most delegations were in favour of the deletion

entirely of Article 52 (3). Nevertheless, in view of the fact

that there was no unanimity on this question, the Chairman said

he could not yet agree to entire deletion of Article 52(3).

Preliminary Article

8. There were no changes in the EC position.

Article 57

9.

The Chairman explained that the new text for Article 57 (3)

in the first tiret equated the position of EFTA countries with

the position within the European Communities. The UK agreed with

this formulation, which would, moreover, provide for the Parallel

Convention to be an "open" Convention. As it was, not all EFTA Member States would be party. France agreed that the EFTA could

not be referred to anywhere in this Convention as a legal entity

and this point was agreed by the Chairman. The Chairman also

drew attention to the formula in Article 57 (3) which referred to

recognition "otherwise admissible under the law of the State

addressed". This was a formula to cater for the point which

Jenard had made on the preservation of common law rules of

recognition of jurisdiction.

t

Article 64 declarations of extension

10. The UK explained that it would wish to make declarations of

extension in respect of Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin

Islands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, Montserrat and the

Turks and Caicos Islands. It was these territories which had

shown an interest in the Parallel Convention. Denmark said it

would wish to extend to the Faeroes and to Greenland.

France