|
|
登入後,內容更豐富
您需要 登錄 才可以下載或查看，沒有賬號？註冊
×
本帖最後由 smuck141 於 2012-3-28 11:09 編輯
我上年出過帖關於呢個訴訟：
http://141hongkong.com/forum/thread-831222-1-2.html
上訴庭今日頒下判詞，裁定政府上訴得直，即係話《入境條例》將外傭喺香港工作嘅時間自動不被視為「通常居於香港」並冇違憲。
高等法院首席法官張舉能判詞主要部份係第116段：
In my view, the exclusion of foreign domestic helpers under section 2(4)(a)(vi) does not encroach upon the central characteristic of the term “ordinarily resident”. It is a category of exclusion not different in kind, but only in degree, from the pre‑existing categories of excluded persons, for instance, Vietnamese refugees and imprisoned or detained persons. Regardless of her own subjective intention or purposes, a foreign domestic helper’s stay in Hong Kong is for a very special, limited purpose from society’s point of view – to meet society’s acute demand for domestic helpers which cannot be satisfactorily met by the local labour market. Hence, their stays in Hong Kong are highly regulated so as to ensure that they are here to fulfil the special, limited purpose for which they have been allowed to come here in the first place, and no more.
簡單啲講，張官認為外傭可以留喺香港完全係為咗工作呢一個特定嘅理由，因此《入境條例》制定條款管制佢地喺香港嘅時間唔可以當係「通常居住」並無問題，情況就好似其他因為特殊理由留喺香港長時間嘅人（例如難民）一樣，政府係有權制定一啲規則令佢地唔可以有居留權。
|
|
在線雷達
發表於 2012-3-28 11:08:50
廣播
置頂
推舊帖
收嗲鳥
油顏色
阿努阿圖好似真係幾好，認真考慮下
