NG KA LUN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANOTHER

NG KA LUN v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANOTHER

The court declared that on proper interpretation the power under section 17C(2) of the Immigration Ordinance to demand production of proof of identity for inspection can only be exercised for purposes connected with immigration and allowed the application to that extent, disposing of the proceedings by consent and granting leave to discontinue with the agreed costs order.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1489
Parties
1st Respondent: Commissioner of Police; 2nd Respondent: Secretary for Justice
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 May 2021
Case Number
HCAL1593/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Disposed by Consent (declaration and Discontinuance)
Outcome
Application allowed in part by consent: declaration made as to interpretation of s17C(2); leave to discontinue granted; agreed costs order made.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation of Police/immigration Powers, Identity Checks Under Immigration Legislation, Constitutionality Under Basic Law and HKBOR, Consent Orders in Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation of Police/immigration Powers Identity Checks Under Immigration Legislation Constitutionality Under Basic Law and HKBOR Consent Orders in Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Police

1st Respondent

Secretary for Justice

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Disposed by Consent (declaration and Discontinuance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner of Police lawfully demanded production of the Applicant's identity under s17C(2) of the Immigration Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether s17C(2) may be exercised only for purposes connected with immigration control
  3. 3 Whether s17C(2) is inconsistent with Article 28 or 31 of the Basic Law or Articles 5(1), 8(1) and 8(3) of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The court declared that on proper interpretation the power under section 17C(2) of the Immigration Ordinance to demand production of proof of identity for inspection can only be exercised for purposes connected with immigration and allowed the application to that extent, disposing of the proceedings by consent and granting leave to discontinue with the agreed costs order.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part by consent: declaration made as to interpretation of s17C(2); leave to discontinue granted; agreed costs order made.

Orders

  • Declaration that the power under section 17C(2) of the Immigration Ordinance (Cap 115) to demand production of proof of identity for inspection can only be exercised for purposes connected with immigration
  • The Applicant's application for judicial review is allowed to the extent of the declaration in paragraph 1