TNAG-2327-FCO40-3371-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-implementation-and-conferences-1991 — Page 4

2

intended to protect the

creditors, Judge Downey

rights of others, viz, judgement considered that jurisdiction was

not proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued because

(a)

enforcement of the prohibition order might involve exercising the powers of arrest and imprisonment in sub-section (7) and (8) of the same section which would mean further possible impairment of

personal liberty;

(b)

the

(c)

provision,

unlike making an

order

under

for cause

believing

that

the debtor's

subsection 1(b), did not require the presence of

probable departure from Hong Kong may obstruct or delay the

creditor; and

the facts that the granting of order is a matter

discretion judicial

it could not

months did not offer

for

endure for

and that

more

than 3

5.

adequate safeguards.

In response to the plaintiff's contention that the court's power to declare that pre-existing legislation was repealed could not be invoked in a purely civil disputes between two private persons in view of S.7 BOR, Judge

Downey

held

that

legislation

a was

review

judicial

of pre-existing separate and distinct power conferred upon the courts, and intended to be exercised in every case irrespective of the status or identity of the parties.

6.

The

Director of

Legal

Aid who

the represents The hearing was

judgement creditor has lodged an appeal.

set

are

down for mid-November. The Attorney General's Chambers considering whether they respond to any invitation from

the court to become involved in this case.

leted

zec