TNAG-2819-FCO40-4068-Future-of-Hong-Kong-International-Rights-and-Obligations-(IR-1993 — Page 83

CONFIDENTIAL

4

Order may be varied under the version of the 1956 Act as

it stood when the provision to be varied was made. If

the provision to be varied was not in the Act at the

time when the variation is desired, it is not possible

to vary it now. With respect, we read paragraph 36(2)

differently. In our view, the words "under which it was

made" refer. to the provision under which the 1972 and

And that the

1979 Orders to be

varied was made.

provision referred to is Section 31 of the 1956 Act.

9.

Any other

conclusion that the

"saving" provisions

overseas

view leads to the ludicrous

UK Parliament, in enacting the

for the continued application

of the legislation it was repealing

domestically, intended to emasculate the power of the Queen in Council to extend provisions of the 1956 Act in

its ultimately developed form. We cannot see that any

court would be ready to hold that Parliament had so

severely circumscribed the continuing power of the

Sovereign to make provision for copyright law in Her

overseas dependencies after the demise of the 1956 Act

in the UK unless the words of the repealing statute were

so clear as to compel no other conclusion.

10.

Summary.

The power of "varying" the

Copyright Orders applicable to Hong Kong must surely include the ability to amend what is stated in Part I of

Schedule 1 and to make changes in the list of sections

which are excepted from extension. That is to say,

anything which was in the 1956 Act immediately before

its demise as part of the law of the United Kingdom could still be extended to Hong Kong, even though it had not previously been extended, by virtue of the power conferred by paragraph 36(2) of Schedule 1 to the 1988

Act.

/11.

The