判決
HCAL 87/2007
J U D G M E N T
1. In judicial review, the court is concerned with the legality of administrative decisions. The court can examine whether an administrative decision has been made in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions and other common law principles securing the procedural and substantive fairness of the process. However, the court cannot substitute its own view as regards what decision should be made. Provided that the administrative decision is one a minister or an executive body can lawfully make, the court cannot interfere.
9. Graded buildings, even those Classified as Grade I, could be demolished. According to the information set out in the Legco paper, out of the 607 graded buildings in the past 27 years, 54 had been demolished including 5 Grade I buildings.
10. Further, not all Grade I buildings were declared to be monuments by the Authority. 607 historical buildings have been graded and 151 were classified as Grade I. Out of those 151 Grade I buildings, only 28 were declared to be monuments. At the same time, the Authority has also declared 26 Grade II buildings and 3 Grade III buildings as monuments.
11. Hence, as a matter of actual practice in the past, a classification by the Board, whether as Grade I, Grade II or Grade III buildings, is not determinative as regards whether a declaration would be made by the Authority under Section 3 of the Ordinance.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
咩叫輸打羸要? 就係呢個結果一出, 就鬧司法唔獨立呀同流合污呀解殖未成功呀之類既人..
又, 呢幾個論點其實早有人提及, 唔聽唔理之流, 硬係要迫個法官出黎讀多次, 然後連司法都鬧埋. 咁樣, 我己經唔能夠覺得係理性既討論(雖則好耐之前己經唔多係).
而又, 既然輸梗, 唔係應該在判決前諗掂傾掂應該點利用呢個輸梗既結果, 去將整個運動作個總結/推進/發展/升上神枱??
J U D G M E N T
1. In judicial review, the court is concerned with the legality of administrative decisions. The court can examine whether an administrative decision has been made in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions and other common law principles securing the procedural and substantive fairness of the process. However, the court cannot substitute its own view as regards what decision should be made. Provided that the administrative decision is one a minister or an executive body can lawfully make, the court cannot interfere.
9. Graded buildings, even those Classified as Grade I, could be demolished. According to the information set out in the Legco paper, out of the 607 graded buildings in the past 27 years, 54 had been demolished including 5 Grade I buildings.
10. Further, not all Grade I buildings were declared to be monuments by the Authority. 607 historical buildings have been graded and 151 were classified as Grade I. Out of those 151 Grade I buildings, only 28 were declared to be monuments. At the same time, the Authority has also declared 26 Grade II buildings and 3 Grade III buildings as monuments.
11. Hence, as a matter of actual practice in the past, a classification by the Board, whether as Grade I, Grade II or Grade III buildings, is not determinative as regards whether a declaration would be made by the Authority under Section 3 of the Ordinance.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
咩叫輸打羸要? 就係呢個結果一出, 就鬧司法唔獨立呀同流合污呀解殖未成功呀之類既人..
又, 呢幾個論點其實早有人提及, 唔聽唔理之流, 硬係要迫個法官出黎讀多次, 然後連司法都鬧埋. 咁樣, 我己經唔能夠覺得係理性既討論(雖則好耐之前己經唔多係).
而又, 既然輸梗, 唔係應該在判決前諗掂傾掂應該點利用呢個輸梗既結果, 去將整個運動作個總結/推進/發展/升上神枱??
posted by Aster at 14:50
4 Comments:
老實, 未打就難言輸定贏, 有個官判有例可依, 都好geh.
只怕佢地會繼續上訴, 玩番三五七月. :)
又, 輸打贏要人人都係0甘, 佢地都唔例外. :)
老實, 未打就難言輸定贏, 有個官判有例可依, 都好geh.
只怕佢地會繼續上訴, 玩番三五七月. :)
又, 輸打贏要人人都係0甘, 佢地都唔例外. :)
"打定輸數"只是指在運動的層面而言需有兩手準備而矣~
判左係好, 至少有例可依, 然而結果反而是突顯了新左青不講理的形像, 可惜..
頭先上 inmedia ，睇左本土行動回應，又唔係你講咁，話佢地勾結喎，只係話「現有制度及法例容許行政部門權力獨大……如果不進行徹底的改革，香港的保育工作毫無希望可言」。我都幾認同喎，我覺得佢地講得都幾理性丫。
《本土行動回應司法覆核結果聲明——行政獨大，保育無望》
發佈留言
<< Home