Like Tree5Likes

Filipino maid's son born and raised in Hong Kong loses permanent residency bid

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    15,557

    Filipino maid's son born and raised in Hong Kong loses permanent residency bid

    Filipino maid's son born and raised in Hong Kong loses permanent residency bid | South China Morning Post

    "Joseph James Gutierrez, 17, was born to Josephine Gutierrez in Hong Kong in December 1996 and has lived with his mother in the city ever since, apart from a few short breaks in the Philippines."

    "The judges wrote that a child or young adult who is not a Chinese national but was born in Hong Kong, and who wanted to apply for permanent residency before the age of 21, had to meet the criteria according to the Basic Law."

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    12,323

    So apparently he failed to prove that Hong Kong was his place of permanent residence. Huh? The kid clearly has no other home so how can it NOT be his place of permenant residence?

    What kind of visa was he on? He couldn't have been on a DH visa because he couldn't (as a baby) legally work. And the DH visa is the only one that does not confer permanent residence.

    Ruling doesn't make sense to me on a legal basis.

    I have no problem with differential laws - particularly if people make choices to come here and know the consequences. But you don't choose where you are born.....


  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Sarcasm - because beating the crap out of people is illegal
    Posts
    14,622

    Well he wouldn't have been on a dependent visa.

    Anyone have a link to the actual ruling?


  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968

    Is this it?

    Judgment

    Not read it yet ... should provide some more information than what is in the SCMP article.


  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968

    Some more info here .... seems like this is not an obvious case.

    A.1 The circumstances of the appellant and his mother6. Ms Gutierrez was born in the Philippines on 23 September 1963. She married Mr Marcial B Gutierrez in 1977 and four children were born of that union between 1980 and 1987, before the couple separated. On 6 June 1991, Ms Gutierrez was issued with a visa and commenced employment as a foreign domestic helper in Hong Kong in July 1991.7. Between then and the making of the verification applications, Ms Gutierrez lived in Hong Kong, engaged as a foreign domestic helper by seven different employers over periods of employment varying between 8 months and six years.[8] 8. The appellant was born on 1 December 1996, between the end of Ms Gutierrez’s fourth employment (23 April 1996) and the start of her fifth (19 June 1997), while she was in Hong Kong on a visitor’s visa[9] which evidently covered the period of her pregnancy. The appellant’s father is said to be a United States citizen to whom Ms Gutierrez was not married and with whom she has lost contact. 9. After his birth, the appellant was granted a visitor’s visa until he went to the Philippines on 30 August 1997, having been issued with a Philippine passport on 26 March 1997. Some four months later, he returned to Hong Kong and, with numerous visitor visa extensions, he has lived continuously (except for certain periods of absence discussed later) with his mother at the premises of her various employers up to and after the making of his verification application on 20 December 2006.10. The Court of Appeal[10] summarised the circumstances of the appellant relied on by his mother in an affirmation filed on his behalf in the proceedings before the Tribunal in the following terms:
    “(1) Joseph had no home in the Philippines and spoke little Tagalog;
    (2) he had completely integrated into Hong Kong society where he has all his friends;
    (3) he speaks fluent English and some Mandarin and Cantonese, which he learns at school here;
    (4) he and she enjoyed a close relationship with her employer’s family and Joseph and her employer’s son treat each other like brothers;
    (5) he has two half-brothers working in Hong Kong at the time the affirmation was made;
    (6) Joseph is an active participant in sports at the local residents’ club, and is a keen football player; and
    (7) he had told his mother that he wishes to be a pilot when he grows up and she had enrolled him in a ‘Basics of Flying’ course organised by Cathay Pacific.”
    11. It is on the basis of that evidence that the appellant submits that he qualifies as a Hong Kong permanent resident and that the Commissioner was wrong to refuse to issue him with a permanent identity card.



  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Sarcasm - because beating the crap out of people is illegal
    Posts
    14,622

    How could he get visitor visa after visitor visa for up to 180 days at time? Seems strange.


  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Claire ex-ax:
    How could he get visitor visa after visitor visa for up to 180 days at time? Seems strange.
    Filipino passport is a 180 day visa??

    May be the employers had filed for a longer term visa....
    janice_1129 likes this.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,517
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    Filipino passport is a 180 day visa??

    May be the employers had filed for a longer term visa....
    Filipinos usually only get 14 days.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,454
    Original Post Deleted
    For 17 years?

    Edit Oh for 10 years. But even so. She found a decent immd official twice a year for 10 years?
    Last edited by usehername; 19-09-2014 at 12:27 AM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    14,624
    Quote Originally Posted by usehername:
    For 17 years?

    Edit Oh for 10 years. But even so. She found a decent immd official twice a year for 10 years?
    As said above PH do not have (normally) 180 days visa like Brits but 14 days....so highly impossible that for 10 years the same official 20+ times a year issued an extension.

    Doesn't seem like a straightforward case. Once there is clarity on how visa were granted might be easier to really understand.

    That said if the boy did indeed live in Hk for 17 years a bit odd that he was refused.

    I guess more to come on the case soon.


    Sent from my iPad using GeoClicks

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast