Q v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION

Q v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION

The court held that the Commissioner’s Policy requiring completion of SRS (as defined) before permitting a change of gender entry on the ID card is, on the facts and in law, a legitimate and proportionate administrative requirement that strikes a reasonable balance between individual rights to physical integrity/privacy and significant public interests in legal certainty and safety; the applicants' challenges were dismissed and the Commissioner’s refusal decisions were lawful.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 295
Parties
Applicant: Q; Applicant: R; Applicant: TSE HENRY EDWARD; Putative Respondent: Commissioner of Registration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL229/2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (constitutional and Administrative Law) / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Applications dismissed; Commissioner of Registration's policy and refusal decisions upheld
Legal Topics
Gender Recognition on Identity Documents, Transgender Rights, Sterilisation/srs Requirement, Right to Physical Integrity, Proportionality Review, Margin of Appreciation, Administrative Policy and Legal Certainty, Coercion and Informed Consent
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Gender Recognition Health Law Gender Recognition on Identity Documents Transgender Rights Sterilisation/srs Requirement +5 more

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Q

Applicant

R

Applicant

TSE HENRY EDWARD

Applicant

Commissioner of Registration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (constitutional and Administrative Law) / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner’s Policy requiring completion of sex reassignment surgery (SRS) including removal of uterus and ovaries as a precondition to change the gender entry on the ID card violates the applicants' rights to privacy and physical integrity
  2. 2 Whether the Challenged Requirements amount to forced sterilisation or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
  3. 3 Whether the Policy is a proportionate and objectively justified administrative measure balancing private rights and public interests

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Commissioner’s Policy requiring completion of SRS (as defined) before permitting a change of gender entry on the ID card is, on the facts and in law, a legitimate and proportionate administrative requirement that strikes a reasonable balance between individual rights to physical integrity/privacy and significant public interests in legal certainty and safety; the applicants' challenges were dismissed and the Commissioner’s refusal decisions were lawful.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed; Commissioner of Registration's policy and refusal decisions upheld

Orders

  • Applications dismissed
  • Commissioner of Registration's policy and refusal decisions upheld