Thursday 19th December 2013
The landmark Court of Final Appeal ruling on social welfare under the Basic Law has implications for the proposed Buyer's Stamp Duty and Double Stamp Duty, which both discriminate against non-permanent residents, contrary to Article 25 of the Basic Law, as we have said before. See the judgment below. Meanwhile, another HKID case:
SHKF's abuse of HKID numbers
Next in our series on the abuse of HKID numbers as passwords comes stockbroker Sung Hung Kai Financial, which uses them to "secure" e-mailed statements. (19-Dec-2013)
RECENTLY ON WEBB-SITE
Citibank's abuse of HKID numbers
We urge another bank to cease and desist from treating the HKID as a password. (18-Dec-2013)
The new Dragonair First Class: Cathay Pacific Business Class passengers have seen it all before... (17-Dec-2013)
IN OTHER NEWS
Listing Committee censures Besunyen (0926), its Chairman and Vice-chairman
Kong Yunming v Director of Social Welfare
HK Court of Final Appeal, 17-Dec-2013
A landmark case on Articles 25, 36 and 145 of the Basic Law. As Justice Bokhary notes: "It will be noticed at once that these guarantees of equality are not confined to permanent residents. Article 25...speaks of all residents...". This ruling thus has implications for the proposed Buyer's Stamp Duty and Double Stamp Duty, which both discriminate against non-permanent residents. It adds support to our view that the proposed duties are unconstitutional.
Pass it on!
This free newsletter goes to over 20,000 practitioners, issuers, regulators and investors in Hong Kong's markets. If you enjoy Webb-site, then please invite a friend to find out what they are missing and subscribe! Visit our archives, and do your homework before you invest.
Remember that, apart from our occasional articles, you can follow our daily updates on HK events via RSS, Twitter, or Facebook.Copyright notice