Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Permanent residence

Legal area

Court

22 May 2015

ABAYOMI BAMIDELE FAYOMI v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND ANOTHER

Citation

ABAYOMI BAMIDELE FAYOMI v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL60/2009

Applicant did not suffer any prejudice from the Commissioner/registration officer's failure to inquire in May 2003 because he knew he had applied only for unconditional stay, knew the distinction from permanent residence, recognized his status when he received the identity card, and chose not to apply during the eligible period; accordingly the judicial review is dismissed and no mandamus is granted.
18 Sept 2014

GUTIERREZ JOSEPH JAMES, a minor v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

GUTIERREZ JOSEPH JAMES, a minor v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV2/2014

The Court held that Prem Singh's test for Article 24(2)(4) (requiring both subjective intention and objective evidence of steps taken to make Hong Kong one's permanent residence) applies to child applicants with assessment taking into account actions or arrangements by parents or guardians; on the facts the appellant, aged 10 at application, failed to show objective steps or arrangements by his mother or others establishing that he had taken Hong Kong as his permanent residence. The Court further held Regulation 25 proviso does not make exempted visitors "qualified to obtain" identity cards f…
16 Jul 2013

DOMINGO DANIEL L. v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

DOMINGO DANIEL L. v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV20/2012

The appellants failed at the primary substantive point (construction of "ordinarily resident"); because the Commissioner’s sequential and contingent arguments were reasonably arguable and not abusive, costs should follow the event and the Commissioner is entitled to his costs; a certificate for four counsel is justified given the importance and breadth of the issues.
7 Jun 2013

GUTIERREZ JOSEPH JAMES, a minor v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

GUTIERREZ JOSEPH JAMES, a minor v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV22/2012

Although the Tribunal erred in adopting a rigid rule equating the child's permanence and ordinary residence with the mother's, on the facts the mother had not taken concrete steps to make Hong Kong the child's sole permanent home and the child had no lawful, continuing permission to reside that would sustain seven years continuous ordinary residence; multiple‑entry visas did not secure a right of re‑entry; accordingly the appellant failed both the permanence and continuous residence requirements and the appeal was dismissed.
4 Jul 2007

NG WING HUNG v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

NG WING HUNG v. COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL125/2006

The Tribunal's decision was quashed because it failed to address substantial and material challenges to the primary evidence relied upon (the four BEEA letters, the application form and related witness statement), and it made a determinative factual finding on PRC law (that reunion with an uncle is a recognized ground) without evidential basis; accordingly the Tribunal's conclusion that the Commissioner had discharged the burden was unreasonable and the matter must be remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for fresh determination.
25 Jan 2007

COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION v. REGISTRATION OF PERSONS TRIBUNAL

Citation

COMMISSIONER OF REGISTRATION v. REGISTRATION OF PERSONS TRIBUNAL
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL39/2005

The Tribunal erred in law by treating periods of absence while the appellant only held visitor permission as compatible with seven years continuous ordinary residence; the Tribunal's reliance on hypothetical intentions and slender evidence (property, bank account, travel) failed the Prem Singh permanence test and made its decision unreasonable and liable to be quashed.
28 Sept 2006

SUN JIE v. REGISTRATION OF PERSONS TRIBUNAL AND OTHERS

Citation

SUN JIE v. REGISTRATION OF PERSONS TRIBUNAL AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV20/2006

Absence from Hong Kong after the applicant's permission to remain had ended broke the continuity of his ordinary residence; his later return was based on a different and found‑false basis so he did not satisfy s.2(6) of the Immigration Ordinance and leave to appeal is not reasonably arguable and is refused.
11 Jul 2006

MAURA JULIET A. RAQUIZA v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

MAURA JULIET A. RAQUIZA v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL20/2006

Applicant's continuous ordinary residence could only be counted from 14 April 1997 (dependant status); the 1992 absence was a break and periods as a foreign domestic helper are excluded under s.2(4)(a)(vi), so by 9 July 2003 applicant had only about six years and two months and did not meet the seven‑year requirement; accordingly she had no entitlement and the Director owed no general duty to inform about VEPIC; judicial review dismissed.
25 Feb 1987

RE WONG LEUNG FOO

Citation

RE WONG LEUNG FOO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP209/1987

The applicant did not satisfy the statutory definition of a Chinese resident (no continuous seven years ordinary residence) and produced no evidence of an express statutory or legal right to remain arising from pre-1972 practice; administrative policy cannot create or preserve an accrued right contrary to the clear provisions of the Immigration Ordinance, and under s.64 the applicant bore the onus of proving any exemption — accordingly the removal order was lawful and the application dismissed.