Vidler & Co. Solicitors - ceased practice on 3 June, 2022

05/06/2022

Vidler & Co Solicitors ceased practice on 3 June, 2022.

23/03/2022

Our Senior Partner Mr. Michael Vidler with his mentee Hannah under the QSA x FinS Mentorship Program. Hannah has been supplementing her JD studies with hands-on experience at an internship at Vidler & Co. Solicitors.

Michael and mentee Hannah had their first meet and greet at his offices Vidler & Co Solicitors.

22/03/2022

Do you know we are on LinkedIn? Follow us!
https://hk.linkedin.com/company/vidler-co

16/03/2022

The 11th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot – Sponsored by Vidler & Co. Solicitors.

Congratulations to the three teams who overcame fierce competition from 49 other teams to make it to the finals of the 11th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot held on Saturday 12 March 2022.

The finalist teams were: Mr. Sam Ko and Mr. Samuel Cheung from the University of Hong Kong (HKU); Mr. Marvin Hsu and Mr. John Wang of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK); and Ms. Christy Cheung and Ms. Winnie Cheung of the City University of Hong Kong (CityU)

The teams argued a challenging moot problem kindly drafted by Mr. Geoffrey Yeung of Denis Chang’s Chambers, concerning the constitutionality of compulsory vaccination against “Cupid-19” (a deadly infectious disease) and fictitious regulations making it an offence for any person to not receive the vaccine unless exempted for medical reasons.

We are pleased to announce the winners of the 11th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot were Mr. Sam Ko and Mr. Samuel Cheung from HKU. The award for best oralist was given to Mr. Samuel Cheung from HKU and the award for best written skeleton submissions was given to Mr. Marvin Hsu and Mr. John Wang from CUHK.

We would like to thank our distinguished judging panel for the finals, comprised of the Honourable Mr. Justice Godfrey Lam JA, Mr. Jin Pao SC of Temple Chambers and Mr. Timothy Parker of Denis Chang’s Chambers, and all the judges of the Preliminary Rounds.

We also thank Mr. Joshua Baker of Prince’s Chambers, Mr. Carter Chim and Ms. Allison Wong of Denis Chang’s Chambers for coaching and mentoring the finalists.

Our thanks also go to Ms. Vanessa Ho, Trainee Solicitor at Vidler and Co. Solicitors, who organized this year’s moot with the able assistance of Ms. Sonia Chan, Practice Development Manager of Denis Chang’s Chambers; Dr. Massimo Lando, Assistant Professor at the School of Law of CityU; Ms. Maxine Law and her team from the Advocacy and Mooting Society of HKU; and Mr. Sunny Liu from the Mooting Society of the Faculty of Law of CUHK.

Due to ongoing COVID 19 restrictions, this year’s competition was held on Zoom, kindly hosted by Denis Chang’s Chambers. The awards and winning prize money will be presented individually at the offices of Vidler & Co on a date to be fixed.

07/03/2022

Invitation – To Attend the Final Round of the 11th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot (via Zoom)

We cordially invite you to join the Final Round of the 11th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot (“HKHR Moot”) to be held on 12 March 2022 (Saturday) at 09:30am via Zoom.

Finalist teams from the University of Hong Kong, the City University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong will compete against each other in a hypothetical judicial review appeal before the Court of Final Appeal. The moot case concerns the constitutionality of compulsory vaccination against “Cupid-19” (an infectious disease that can be dangerous for those who are immunocompromised) and the “Compulsory Vaccination Regulation (Cap. 599V)” which makes it an offence for any person to not receive the vaccine against “Cupid-19” unless exempted for medical reasons. The vaccine in question has been shown to be safe and highly effective in clinical trials so far, but there have been unconfirmed reports of side-effects affecting one’s body movement.

Against this background, a sportsman has refused to receive the vaccine for fear of its potential side-effects and has challenged the constitutionality of “Cap. 599V”, claiming that it disproportionately interferes with his right to privacy under Article 14 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. An immunocompromised Cupid-19 patient has intervened, claiming that the Government has a positive obligation to introduce compulsory vaccination to protect her rights, including her right to life under Article 2 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights.

This year we are honoured to have the Honourable Mr. Justice Godfrey Lam JA, Mr. Jin Pao SC of Temple Chambers and Mr. Timothy Parker of Denis Chang’s Chambers to adjudicate the Final Round.

The moot problem was kindly drafted by Mr. Geoffrey Yeung of Denis Chang’s Chambers. (All details about “Cupid-19” and vaccines in the moot problem are fictitious and do not reflect the realities of COVID-19 and related vaccines.)

Please register at https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMkcOigrTMqHN2QW1lrnlda1QCxNvQPuemA by 5:00pm on 11 March 2022 (Friday).

For enquiries, please contact Ms. Vanessa Ho at [email protected].

-----------

Please note that audio or video recording of the Final Round of the 11th HKHR Moot is strictly prohibited.

The HKHR Moot was launched in 2010 by Vidler & Co. Solicitors to raise awareness amongst Hong Kong law students about human rights issues in Hong Kong. Previous moot questions have touched upon a diverse range of topical public law issues – including questions relating to race discrimination, recognition of foreign registered same-s*x marriages, prisoners’ rights, and freedom of expression.

10/02/2022

Recognition of Same S*x Marriages in the Allocation of Public Rental Housing and Home Ownership Scheme

Upcoming appeal hearing of Nick Infinger v The Hong Kong Housing Authority, CACV 81/2020 (on appeal from HCAL 2647/2018) and Ng Hon Lam Edgar, Li Yik Ho v The Hong Kong Housing Authority, CACV 362/2021 (on appeal from HCAL 2875/2019).

------
On 16-17 February 2022 the Court of Appeal will hear the above Housing Authority (“HA”) appeals against the separate judgments by Hon Chow J (as he then was) sitting in the Court of First Instance (“CFI”), handed down on 4 March 2020 (Infinger) and 25 June 2021 (Edgar Ng).

The HA is appealing the Infinger judgment in which the court granted:-

1. A declaration that the Spousal Policy of the HA to exclude same-s*x couples who have entered into lawful and monogamous marriages overseas from eligibility to apply for Public Rental Housing as Ordinary Families under the General Application category is unlawful and unconstitutional for being in violation of Article 25 of the Basic Law and Article 22 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights.

2. An order of certiorari to bring up the Eligibility Decision and Registration Decision to the High Court and quash those decisions.

The HA is also appealing the Edgar Ng judgment in which the court allowed a similar but separately litigated judicial review against the HA’s refusal to treat same-s*x spouses as spouses / family members under the Home Ownership Scheme.

------
Background:

In March 2018, Mr. Infinger and his same-s*x spouse applied to the HA for a public rental housing unit. The HA rejected the application under its policy excluding same-s*x married couples from eligibility to apply for public housing as an “ordinary family”.

Mr. Infinger lodged a judicial review on 22 November 2018, challenging the HA policy. The case was heard on 27 September 2019 by Hon Chow J (as he then was) and judgment handed down on 4 March 2020 declaring the policy to be unlawful and unconstitutional.

The judgment can be found here: https://www.hklii.hk/cgi-bin/sinodisp/eng/hk/cases/hkcfi/2020/329.html?stem=&synonyms=&query=title(infinger)%20OR%20ncotherjcitationtitles(infinger)&nocontext=1.

The HA lodged its Notice of Appeal in May 2020 and the appeal was fixed to be heard on 29 July 2021.

------
Delay in the Appeal Hearing:

On 1 June 2021 (14 months after the deadline for the HA to lodge its grounds of appeal and the month before the appeal was due to be heard) the HA applied for and was granted leave to amend its grounds of appeal. Separately, on 25 June 2021, the CFI handed down its judgment in the Edgar Ng case.

After the HA indicated its intention to appeal the Edgar Ng judgment (but before Notice of Appeal was lodged) the Court of Appeal, of its own volition, directed that the Nick Infinger appeal hearing, which was due to be heard 3 weeks later, be vacated and that both appeals be heard together.

Consequently, when the appeals are heard on 16-17 February 2022 nearly two years will have passed since the CFI declared the HA policy unlawful and unconstitutional.

Mr. Infinger will be represented at the appeal by Counsels Mr. Tim Parker and Mr. Geoffrey Yeung of Denis Chang’s Chambers, instructed by Vidler & Co. Solicitors.

Note that the court has recently directed that the hearing will now be held remotely. Members of the public and press will however be able to attend the hearing subject to COVID restrictions that can be found at https://www.judiciary.hk/en/court_services_facilities/against_covid19.html

27/01/2022

LGBTI Rights / Recognition Of Transgendered Persons In Their Acquired Gender

Challenge to HK Policy Requiring Trans Persons To Undergo Full S*x Reassignment Surgery (“SRS”) Before The S*x Identifier On Their Identity Card Is Amended To Reflect Their Acquired Gender (“the Policy”)

Q and Henry Tse v Commissioner of Registration; CACV 183-184/2019.

On 26 January 2022 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment dismissing the appeals of Q and Henry Tse against an earlier Court of First Instance decision refusing their judicial review challenge to the Policy.

------
Q and Henry are Hong Kong born female-to-male transgender men who have completed their transition to the male gender. They present socially as males with developed physiques, deep voices as well as facial and body hair. Their specialist doctors have confirmed that there is no therapeutic need for them to undergo SRS to alleviate their gender dysphoria.

Both have foreign travel documents which record their s*x as male and wish to change the s*x identifier on their Hong Kong identity cards (which record their s*x as female) in accordance with their acquired gender, to male.

They suffer humiliation and discrimination because of the difference between their social and physical presentation as male in their everyday lives and the female s*x identifiers on their identity cards. This is aggravated because of the requirement for Hong Kong residents to carry their identity cards at all times in public and present them in order to access public and private services / facilities.

Neither Q nor Henry wants to undergo SRS which involves highly invasive major surgery for the removal of their uterus and the construction of “some form of pen*s”.

Both consider that the Policy requirement for full SRS:-

1. Constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Art.3 of the Bill of Rights;
2. Is disproportionate and breaches their Right to Privacy; and
3. Is indirectly discriminatory (in comparison to male-to-female transgendered persons).

------
The full judgment of the Court of Appeal can be found here: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/word/vetted/other/en/2019/CACV000183_2019.doc

Both appellants intend to appeal this latest decision to the Court of Final Appeal.

------
Comments by Q and Henry after the judgment:

Q said: “This is a setback, but I take comfort from the fact that there are others before me who have fought for LGBT+ rights, who have had to appeal their cases all the way to the Court of Final Appeal before their rights were recognised.”

Henry said: “Clearly I am disappointed by today’s judgment. I endure humiliation and discrimination every time I have to present my identity card, so this decision is a blow. I remain determined however to pursue my case to the Court of Final Appeal so that I can have an ID card that reflects my acquired gender with having to undergo unnecessary, painful and degrading surgery.”

------
See our previous posts on 1 May, 3 and 4 September, 2 October, 12 November and 20 December of 2018; 11, 21 and 30 January 2019; 27 May and 6 September 2021 for more details on the progress of this litigation and links to the judgment at the Court of First Instance.

See also the judgment of the Court of Final Appeal in the case of W v The Registrar of Marriages (FACV 4/2012) the link to which can be found here: https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=87115&QS=%2B&TP=JU

25/01/2022

LGBTI Rights / Recognition Of Transgendered Persons In Their Acquired Gender.

Update on Q and Henry Tse v Commissioner of Registration; CACV 183-184/2019.

The Court of Appeal will tomorrow (26 January 2022 at 9:45am) hand down Judgment on the appeals of Q and Henry Tse against the Commissioner of Registration. The appeals concern the recognition of transgendered persons in their acquired gender and the current policy of the Commissioner requiring applicants wanting to amend their s*x identifier on their Hong Kong identity cards, to undergo full s*x reassignment surgery.

The appeals were heard on 13 and 14 September 2021 before the Hon. Mr P**n CJHC, the Hon. Ms Kwan VP and the Hon. Mr Barma JA.

Ms Dinah Rose QC leading Hectar Pun SC and Earl Deng of Counsel instructed by Vidler & Co Solicitors appeared for the Appellants on assignment by the Director of Legal Aid.

See our previous post of 6 September 2021 for more details on the appeal.

01/12/2021

In profile on Metro Broadcast.

On 28 November 2021 Wong Hiu Chong, our Head of Family and Civil litigation was the feature profile on Metro Radio’s flagship programme 筆請字來in interview with Alaric Chu (Executive Programme Director of Metro Finance FM 104). Hiu Chong talked about her journey into the legal profession and becoming a partner of Vidler & Co, her practice in family and matrimonial law, and her co-authorship of “Hong Kong Family Court Tables (Duxbury Etc)” the free bilingual reference source for anyone involved in family law matters and matrimonial disputes. (Available at www.duxburyetc.hk and in hard copy print).

The radio programme was broadcast at 10.30pm on 28 November 2021 (https://www.facebook.com/596344560446754/posts/4547653911982446/?d=n ). The link to the broadcast is available at https://bit.ly/3o28w3X .

新城財經台訪問

2021 年 11 月 28 日，我們的家事和民事訴訟主管黃曉莊在新城財經台的旗艦節目《筆請字來》接受朱子昭（新城財經台 FM 104執行總監）的訪問。曉莊談及她進入法律界並成為韋智達律師行 Vidler & Co 合夥人的歷程，她在家事法方面的事業，以及她合著的《香港家事法概覽》。《香港家事法概覽》是一份免費雙語參考工具書，為涉及家事法事宜和婚姻糾紛的人提供協助（可於www.duxburyetc.hk 瀏覽或取得印刷版本）。

廣播節目已於2021年11月28日晚上10時30分播出（https://www.facebook.com/596344560446754/posts/4547653911982446/?d=n）。節目可於https://bit.ly/3o28w3X 重溫。

黃曉莊的《香港家事法概覽 - 家事法訴訟人必需知的法律資訊》

大學本科修讀金融財務，黃曉莊畢業後並非投身金錢世界，走去打一份投行工作，或者步步令自己踏上操盤人之路的資產管理基金經理。她走出校園的首份工作，是在議會中從事政策研究，因為日常工作接觸不同性質的法律事項，令她感到愈認識愈有興趣；之後便盟生轉行的念頭，決定全身投入法律界工作。黃曉莊用了7年的時間，修讀相關的法律專業，並得到專業認證。

今集(28/11, 10:30PM)《筆請字來》請來平權律師黃曉莊，來自韋智逹律師行的合夥人，她專門從事家事法、公共法，以及平等機會法；現於韋智達律師行執業，是《香港家事法概覽》（Duxbury Etc）（中文版）的編輯。節目中分享她處理平權案件的種種，不單只離婚或家事爭執，還包括監護、領養、代孕，以及禁制令申請等不同的事件，平權律師如何為興訟雙方處理案件，當中涉及的普通法的法律含議，作為律師應該如何令涉案件中的當事人容易理解，請收聽節目。

如有興趣閱讀這本《香港家事法概覽 》，可以點擊這連結( https://zh.duxburyetc.hk/book )下載電子版。重溫本集《筆請字來》節目，亦可以點擊這連結收聽( https://bit.ly/3o28w3X )。多謝支持。

19/11/2021