Like Tree56Likes

Court overturns maids abode ruling

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tuen Mun
    Posts
    6,191
    Quote Originally Posted by jaykay:
    *Facepalm. Please go back and read. It's a comparison of visas not nationalities FFS. If you can't understand I have someone who can give you English lessons.
    I know what it was Jaykay and I stand by my point.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,517

    Hearing news reports, it seems that maids were being compared in court to Vietnamese refugees and criminals; these two groups also cannot claim abode.

    dear giant likes this.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Sai Kung
    Posts
    4,151

    Thank you for providing evidence of my point.

    It is inherently easier to get a dependant visa than an FDH visa. For most people it's a simple form filling, submit docs and done. No specific criteria, as long as sponser (if PR) earns a wage comparible with average and you have a roof over your head. Slightly more specifics if you are dependant of someone on employment visa but usually just as easy. For Filipinas, Indonesians, Thai, et al there may be more evidence required such as photos, letters, etc. That is it, as long as there is a single brain cell that controls life supporting functions such as breathing it's all good.

    It's not as simple to get an FDH visa and other requirements mean in some terms (such as medicals, training and consulate requirements) it's more difficult to get than some work visas.


  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,517

    On a related note, Mr Justice Bokhary is being replaced by an "older colleague" on the court of final appeal - the older colleague was one of those who ruled against the maids. Mr Justice Bokhary is considered to be the most liberal judge in the top court. See RTHK News.

    dear giant and bookblogger like this.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by drumbrake:
    Hearing news reports, it seems that maids were being compared in court to Vietnamese refugees and criminals; these two groups also cannot claim abode.
    yes, some nice choice of words there from Hong Kong's finest

    I hope he has dropped a clanger and that the maid's lawyers can get him on a technicality.

    overall I am quite ambivalent. Maids are hired on a specific visa which does not give them rights of PR. That is what they sign up for. There is no sophistry involved. At the same time, it doesn't seem right that after living here for 20 years and contributing to the economy, their residency rights are still so vulnerable.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gold Coast Marina
    Posts
    17,934
    Quote Originally Posted by drumbrake:
    On a related note, Mr Justice Bokhary is being replaced by an "older colleague" on the court of final appeal - the older colleague was one of those who ruled against the maids. Mr Justice Bokhary is considered to be the most liberal judge in the top court. See RTHK News.
    They allow that? To have a same judge on the appeal as the original case? Doesn't that rather defeat the purpose of allowing appeals?
    Satay Sue, jgl and dear giant like this.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    11,884

    @drumbrake and shenwen: before you get all worked up about the (admittedly rather tactless) refugee and criminal comparison, it appears that there is a legislative ground for this comparison. See the bold areas below from Claire's previous post.

    He could have just as validly said "consular staff" but that would have probably sounded even stranger.

    This thread was going so well until people started climbing on high horses and substituting emotion for logic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Claire ex-ax:
    If anyone is interested, "ordinary resident" as defined in Hong Kong law:

    (4) For the purposes of this Ordinance, a person shall not be treated as ordinarily resident in Hong Kong-

    (a) during any period in which he remains in Hong Kong- (Amended 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (i) with or without the authority of the Director, after landing unlawfully; or (Amended 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (ii) in contravention of any condition of stay; or (Amended 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (iii) as a refugee under section 13A; or (Added 42 of 1982 s. 2)
    (iv)Hong Kong Garrison in Hong Kong under section 13D; or (Added 23 of 1989 s. 2)
    (v) while employed as a contract worker, who is from outside Hong Kong, under a Government importation of labour scheme; or (Added 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (vi) while employed as a domestic helper who is from outside Hong Kong; or (Added 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (vii) as a member of a consular post within the meaning of the Consular Relations Ordinance (Cap 557); or (Added 122 of 1997 s. 2. Amended 16 of 2000 s. 12)
    (viii) as a member of the Hong Kong Garrison; or (Added 122 of 1997 s. 2)
    (ix) as a holder of a prescribed Central People's Government travel document; or (Added 31 of 2002 s. 2) (b) during any period, whether before or after the commencement of this Ordinance, of imprisonment or detention pursuant to the sentence or order of any court.
    It's also interesting to note that the domestic helper exclusion is fifteen years old. It's not like it was a recent addition. It must've been tied in with the handover as it looks to have been added the same time as the prohibition against members of the British HK Garrison.
    Last edited by jgl; 29-03-2012 at 09:25 AM.
    Satay Sue and Mat like this.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,517
    Quote Originally Posted by MovingIn07:
    They allow that? To have a same judge on the appeal as the original case? Doesn't that rather defeat the purpose of allowing appeals?
    There is a pool of judges on the court of final appeal.

    About Us

    And from Court Services & Facilities
    Who hears the appeal?

    An appeal is heard and determined by the Court of Final Appeal, which is usually made up of the Chief Justice, three permanent judges and either one non-permanent Hong Kong judge or one judge from another common law jurisdiction.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    14,624

    "substituting emotion for logic" the main issue on this topic since day one, be in on geo expat, the local media....


  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    11,884

    @Mat: true. But this thread was going pretty well until about halfway though. It's still pretty good now compared to others that I've seen.

    @Drumbrake: Surely an appeals panel should consist of an entirely new set of judges? I'm not sure if this is standard practice, but would be slightly shocked to find that any legal system would allow the same judges to recycle in that manner. Kind of seems to defeat the purpose. Also, note that Bokhary is turning non-permanent this year, and from your post there is only one slot for a non-permanent judge, so it would be baffling to have him re-hear the case both from a procedural and probabilities point of view.

    I'm sure that there is lots of background politicking going on with this case, but it seems to me that most of the armchair pundits are looking at red herrings.

    Last edited by jgl; 29-03-2012 at 09:53 AM.

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast