9 Nov 1998
THE ASSOCIATION OF EXPATRIATE CIVIL SERVANTS OF HONG KONG v. THE SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE
- Citation
- THE ASSOCIATION OF EXPATRIATE CIVIL SERVANTS OF HONG KONG v. THE SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCAL9/1998
The Chinese language proficiency requirement did not contravene Article 100 because the protected right is confined to the right to apply for transfer and does not freeze the employer's ability to set assessment criteria; the language distinction was treated as lawful under Article 21(c) BOR because the distinction was justified by a legitimate and proportionate public interest (operational need for a bilingual civil service), mitigated by exemptions and training measures; Decisions 1, 4 and 5 were therefore lawful (with leave to AECS to seek restoration of hearing on Decisions 4 and 5 within…