First Published March 27, 2013
The Court of Final Appeal quashed the hopes of 1,067 long stay foreign domestic helpers(“FDHs”) earlier this week when they ruled that time spent in Hong Kong as a foreign domestic helper is not ‘ordinary residence’ for the purposes of a right of abode application.
Putting the human dimension to one side for a moment, in law, the right outcome, to my mind at least, has been determined.
1. FDH’s come to Hong Kong on prescribed, limited terms of employment – they are not allowed to come with ‘settlement’ in mind.
2. If the Court had ruled otherwise, ImmD would simply have introduced an administrative mechanism (say a “maximum 3 contracts” rule) to obviate an FDH from being able to spend 7 years in Hong Kong so the entire exercise would have benefitted only one segment of the FDH community, leaving the rest out in the cold.
3. Do we REALLY want the Basic Law tinkered with by Beijing after all?
I’m glad the saga is over.
The premise in challenging the law was right but the outcome was legally inevitable.
Wikipedia have an excellent synopsis of the case.