法律援助署五十周年紀念特刊 | Legal Aid Department 50th Anniversary Commemorative Publication

英國公民的同性伴侶以受養人身分在香港居住或逗留 Britishnational's same-sex partner to stay inHongKong as dependant 上訴人：入境事務處處長 Appellant: Director of Immigration 答辯人：QT Respondent: QT 終審法院最終判決日期：2018年7月4日 Date of Court of Final Appeal Judgment: 4 July 2018 類別：入境事宜 Category: Immigration matters 終審法院民事上訴2018年第1號 FACV No. 1 of 2018 個案重溫 Case Study Argument for Judicial Review Application 司法覆核申請的理據 ． 處長的決定是基於她的性取向及缺乏理據支持， 對她構成歧視，而且在公法層面來說並不合理。 相關爭議 ． 2011年5月，英國國民QT與擁有南非和英國國籍 的SS根據英國《2004年民事伴侶關係法》，在英 國締結同性民事伴侶關係。 ． SS獲批工作簽證在香港工作，QT則於2014年1月 申請受養人簽證在香港居住或逗留。 ． 入境事務處處長(處長)認為，根據受養人政策， 「配偶」指一男一女根據香港法律締結的一夫一 妻制婚姻的其中一方。 ． 2014年6 月，QT的申請遭到處長拒絕。 ． 2014年10月，QT展開司法覆核程序，尋求推翻處 長的決定。 Dispute ． I n May 2011, British national QT and South African and British national SS entered into a same-sex civil partnership in England under the UK’s Civil Partnership Act 2004. ． SS had been granted an employment visa to work in Hong Kong, while QT applied for a dependant visa to stay in Hong Kong in January 2014. ． According to the Director of Immigration (the Director), under the depend- ant policy, “spouse” meant a party to a monogamous marriage between a man and a woman as recognised under the Hong Kong law. ． In June 2014, the Director refused her application. ． In October 2014, QT commenced judicial review proceedings seeking to quash the Director’s decision. ． Director’s decision was discriminatory against her on sexual orientation grounds that were not justified. It was unreasonable in the public law perspective. Arguments in Opposition 反對的理據 ． 處長表示，採取現行政策有兩個理由：鼓勵具備才 能的人在其受養人陪同下在香港工作；以及維持一 個有效和嚴謹的入境管制制度。 ． 為求法律明確和行政上方便，他有權在已婚與未婚 人士之間劃分一條「明顯界線」。 ． The Director stated two rationales for adopting the existing policy, namely, to encourage persons with talent and accompanied by their dependants to join Hong Kong’s workforce, and to maintain a system of effective and stringent immigration control. ． He was entitled to draw a “clear line” between married and unmarried persons, for the sake of legal certainty and administrative convenience. P.78 法治基石、彰顯公義 Legal Aid for the Rule of Law and Justice [ 2018 ] HKCFA 28