Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sexual orientation discrimination

Legal area

Court

2 Dec 2025

LO THI UN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5706
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL984/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's and Director's decisions, which were supported by evidence and COI showing available state protection and internal relocation alternatives and no real risk of persecution or torture.
26 Nov 2024

THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY v. INFINGER, NICK

Citation

[2024] HKCFA 29
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV2/2024

BL36 does not immunise pre-1997 social welfare entitlements from equality scrutiny under BL25 and BOR22; same-sex couples lawfully married overseas are comparable to opposite-sex married couples for PRH and HOS allocation; the HA's spousal policies discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation and failed the proportionality analysis (stages 3 and 4) because the HA produced no empirical evidence to justify the absolute exclusion and the measures were disproportionate and unjustified, therefore the policies are unlawful and invalid.
17 Oct 2023

NG HON LAM EDGAR v. THE HONG KONG HOUSING AUTHORITY

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1178
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV362/2021

The Court dismissed the HA’s appeals and affirmed the lower courts: married same‑sex couples in valid foreign marriages are proper comparators to opposite‑sex married couples for the purposes of PRH and HOS spousal eligibility; the HA’s Spousal Policies amount to differential treatment on the prohibited ground of sexual orientation and the HA failed to justify that differential treatment under the four‑step test (insufficient evidence of material benefit to the 'Family Aim', absence of rational connection in the HOS context, and lack of necessity); BL36/BL37/BL145 do not exclude review under…
6 Jun 2019

LEUNG CHUN KWONG v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2019] HKCFA 19
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV8/2018

A same-sex married couple contracting a marriage lawfully abroad are in a relevantly analogous position to an opposite-sex married couple for purposes of spousal employment and tax benefits; the respondents conceded differential treatment but failed the justification test because restricting spousal benefits and joint tax assessment to marriages recognised under Hong Kong law is not rationally connected to the legitimate aim of protecting the institution of heterosexual marriage; therefore the Benefits Decision and the Tax Decision could not be justified and amounted to unlawful discriminatio…
4 Jul 2018

DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION v. QT

Citation

[2018] HKCFA 28
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACV1/2018

The Director’s Policy excluding same-sex civil partners from eligibility for dependant visas constituted discriminatory differential treatment on the basis of sexual orientation (at least indirect discrimination) and the Director failed to justify that differential treatment because the Policy was not rationally connected to the legitimate aims asserted (attracting talent and maintaining immigration control); accordingly the Director’s refusal was unlawful and the appeal is dismissed.
25 Sept 2017

QT v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

QT v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV117/2016

The Court of Appeal held that the Director's bright-line Eligibility Requirement excluding overseas same-sex spouses/civil partners from dependant visas amounted to indirect discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and, because immigration does not automatically fall within a core sphere of marriage exempting differential treatment, the Director had to justify the discrimination applying strict proportionality; the Director failed to show a rational connection or necessity for excluding legally recognized overseas same-sex spouses/civil partners and the Policy was unjustified, so the a…
11 Sept 2017

LEUNG CHUN KWONG v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEUNG CHUN KWONG v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL258/2015

The court granted the 1st respondent's application to extend the time for the taking of effect of any order to the final resolution of the appeal because the appeal was reasonably arguable, the Court of Appeal hearing was expedited minimizing delay, the Judgment's implementation would have wide administrative consequences and risk confusion if overturned, and the applicant had delayed in seeking leave; the Revised Undertaking offered by the 1st respondent was accepted as adequate; costs of the summons were ordered to be in the cause of the Appeal.
28 Apr 2017

LEUNG CHUN KWONG v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

LEUNG CHUN KWONG v. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL258/2015

The Secretary's decision to deny civil service spousal benefits to the applicant's overseas same-sex spouse constituted unlawful discrimination based on sexual orientation because the distinction, while framed as marital-status based, disproportionately and unjustifiably disadvantaged same-sex couples who cannot marry under Hong Kong law; by contrast, the Commissioner's Tax Decision correctly construed the IRO's statutory definition of "marriage" and did not engage or violate the equality right in the context of that statutory construction.
11 Mar 2016

QT v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

QT v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL124/2014

Given the context of immigration control and the legitimate aim of striking a balance between attracting skilled workers and controlling population and resources, the Director was entitled to adopt a bright‑line rule based on marital status as defined by Hong Kong law; 'spouse' in the Policy means a party to a marriage lawfully recognised in Hong Kong (heterosexual and monogamous) and the Decision refusing the applicant a dependant visa was not discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation; judicial review dismissed.
17 Jul 2007

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. YAU YUK LUNG ZIGO AND ANOTHER

Citation

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. YAU YUK LUNG ZIGO AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FACC12/2006

Section 118F(1) criminalises only homosexual buggery committed otherwise than in private and thereby draws a dividing line based on sexual orientation; the government failed to demonstrate any genuine need for that differential treatment so the provision fails the first limb of the justification test and is unconstitutional; procedurally, magistrates must consider section 27 (amendment/substitution) and a magistrate's final ruling of unconstitutionality is appealable by case stated; in this appeal the Court dismissed the appeal and ordered costs to the 2nd respondent.