[
    {
        "id": 213442,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1995",
        "page_number": 38,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "CHOK HUNG vs. LI FUI CHOI\n\n\"No enquiry has ever been made to ascertain what Chinese law is. It is an extraordinary fact that the Court of this Colony, in which the Chinese live and trade as freely as Englishmen and citizens of other countries, should do with regard to the Chinese what it would never dream of doing with regard to Frenchmen or Germans or Americans; and not only that, but that it should be entirely in ignorance of Chinese law on any subject which concerns the family life and family law of those who form the bulk of its inhabitants, which is so often before the Courts—its marriage law, and the rights of property it gives; its law applicable to children. We are in the dark as to the law of majority, as to the customary law of China generally, and above all as to its law of succession. The attitude of the Court has been to let the troublesome question wait until it is definitely raised by the parties. I myself have been guilty of this, though I have rebelled more than once or twice.\n\nPage 20\n\nDuring the last half century, there have been three such enquiries, of which the results have been published. I refer, of course, to the Report of the Committee appointed in 1948,1 Greenfield's article on marriage,2 and the report and recommendations on the same subject by the Attorney General and Secretary for Chinese Affairs in 1960.2 The latter two publications do not deal with any Chinese customary law of marriage particularly obtaining in the New Territories, but the first does deal with certain aspects of Chinese customary law peculiar to the New Territories.\n\nIf a search is made of the law reports, only two cases will be found where the particular Chinese customary law obtaining in the New Territories was considered. Prima facie, that is a remarkably small number for 57 years of law reporting, and it is worthwhile probing the reasons for this dearth of case law.\n\nFirstly, the Chinese much prefer to compose their disputes or to refer them to extra-judicial arbitration than to a court of law.**\n\nSecondly, in deference to this general desire of the litigants, the District Officers arranged for the bulk of the disputes which came before them, in their Small Debts Courts or when they sat as Assistant Land Officers to decide summary land cases, to be settled out of court, most",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213475,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1995",
        "page_number": 71,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "38\n\n+ Pung Shan Land Case No. 24 of 1954. TANG LAP LEUNG »» TO SHU KAN (unreported) against which the appeal was similarly dismissed by Reynolds J-Civil Appeal No 24 of 1954 (unreported)\n\nWilson's Notes\n\n(1950) 34 HKLR 297\n\nVide Tenancy Tribunal Appeal No 40 of 1950, NG CHOW HING & OTHERS vs KAM WING CHAN & OTHERS, (1950) 34 HKLR 201\n\nTls Report on the New Territories 1899-1912, para 97 (Hong Kong Sessional Papers, 1912 p. 58) General accounts of \"fung shui\" may also be found in Burkhardt, Chinese Creeds and Customs Hong Kong Vol I p 129 and Vol II p. 137\n\nReport DCNT 1959-60, para, 120\n\n120 Memorandum of District Officer, South, to DCNT, dated 22nd December 1959\n\n121 Report on the New Territories 1899-1912, paras 21(2) and 98 (Hong Kong Sessional Papers. 1912, pp 47 and 58), and Report, DCNT, 1959-60, paras 120 and 135\n\n12 Literally notification of the gods ceremony. Report DCNT, 1959-60 para. 125 and memorandum of District Officer, Yuen Long, to DCNT dated 30th October. 1959\n\nReport on the New Territories 1899-1912 para 98 (Hong Kong Sessional papers. 1912 p 58)\n\nDO Yuen Long, loc cit The District Commissioner's Report for the year 1951-52 contains an amusing account of how one village geomancer was confounded (at para, 19).\n\n25 Wilson Notes\n\n125 ibid\n\n127 Cap 97 viz ss. 27, 29, 30 part II, ss. 14 and 57, vide Committee Report, 1953. Chap II, para. 13 at p 7 and the preliminary point decided in the case of TANG CHU YI HONG vs TANG SHING MO and OTHERS (1949) 33 HKLR 58\n\n128\n\nFor which see Chinese Marriages in Hong Kong, Government Printer, 1960, Greenfield. op cit, and Committee Report, 1953\n\n19 vide intra\n\n10 Things Chinese, 4th Edn 1903, p 424 cf MH Van der Valk. An Outline of Modern Chinese Family Law Peking, 1939, pp 82-83, regarding the position under the Nationalist",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]