TNAG-1735-FCO40-2448-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1988 — Page 157

#

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ·

- 18 May 1988

1419

Sir, the Bill also makes two other changes. First, it amends the Small Claims Tribunal Ordinance and the Labour Tribunal Ordinance so as to make it clear that no appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from a refusal by the High Court to grant leave to appeal to itself from the Labour Tribunal or the Small Claims Tribunal. This brings the position in these tribunals into line with what it is under the general principles that apply elsewhere.

Finally, clause 4(a) of the Bill provides for the repeal of section 46 of the District Court Ordinance. That section, which can trace its ancestry back to a provision relating to small debts which was first enacted in Hong Kong in 1845, prevents persons under the age of 21 from relying on the common law defences available to minors when they are sued for debt or other liabilities. In its report on 'Young Persons-Effects of Age in Civil Law' in 1986, the Law Reform Commission recommended the repeal of section 46. However, since the publica- tion of this Bill the Government has decided to look again at the question whether this is the right time and vehicle for the implementation of this recommendation, and it is likely that the Government will be proposing amendments to clause 4(a) at a later stage.

Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.

Question on adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.

GUARDIANSHIP OF MINORS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1988

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second Reading of: ‘A Bill to amend the Guardianship of Minors Ordinance'.

He said: Sir, I move that the Guardianship of Minors (Amendment) Bill 1988 be read the Second time.

Section 22 of the Guardianship of Minors Ordinance excludes the jurisdiction of the district court in relation to minors over 16 years, unless the minor is physically or mentally incapable of self-support. This restriction on the district court's powers has been in the Ordinance from the outset and has its origins in the Guardianship of Minors Act 1971 of the United Kingdom. This restriction was, however, abolished there in 1978.

The restriction is anomalous as the district court is empowered to deal with all minors under both the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance and the Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance. The Bill before the Council today seeks to remove this anomaly by repealing section 22 of the Ordinance.

Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.

Question on adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.