• Home
  • 主頁
  • About
  • 關於我們
  • Judicial Development Corner
  • Blog
    • Professional legal blog
    • Student legal blog
  • Contact Us
  • 聯絡我們
  • Related Links
  • 相關連結
  • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition
    • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition 2022
    • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition 2021

Latest  Judicial Development

Learn more about latest judicial development and recognition of LGBT+ rights in the Hong Kong courts, as well as landmark overseas judgments.

T v Commissioner of Police: Licence pre-approval not required for certain events for the LGBTQ community in public

14/2/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture

T v Commissioner of Police

Summarised by James Li (Associate)

Background

T was a participant of an event relating to the LGBT and intersex community that was held in a public pedestrian precinct. The event included a dance performed on a temporary stage set up by organizers. The dance was stopped by the police as they alleged the organizers had committed an offence as they did not have a temporary licence under the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance (Cap.172) (PPEO).

The crux of the case is whether the organizers are required to obtain the said licence. This depends on whether the dance was a “public entertainment” and whether the place where it was presented or carried on was a “place of public entertainment” within the definition of the Ordinance.

Issues before the Court of Final Appeal
  1. Whether the dance was a “public entertainment” within the meaning of the Ordinance.
  2. Whether the place where it was presented or carried on was a “place of public entertainment” within the meaning of the Ordinance.

Decision and Reasoning

  1. The dance shall not be regarded as a “public entertainment”. The Ordinance defines “public entertainment” to mean “any entertainment... to which the general public is admitted with or without payment”. The requirement of admission required some form of control over the admission of persons to the public entertainment and a right of exclusion from that place. If the requirement of admission is not met, a licence is not required for the activity.
  2. The meaning of a “place of public entertainment” must incorporate the meaning of “public entertainment”. The admission requirement is therefore also an integral part of a “place of public entertainment”.
​
Comments

Whilst events of the LGBTQ community might be said to only reflect the voices of social minorities, the freedom of expression of such social minorities are directly engaged. It is encouraging to see the Court of Final Appeal recognizing that the imposition of a licence requirement on the keeping or use of a place of public entertainment entailed an interference with the constitutionally protected freedoms of assembly and expression, and such freedoms cannot be restricted by a licensing regime without clear unequivocal wordings in the law.
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    October 2021
    September 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020

    Categories

    All
    Dependant Policy
    Family
    Homosexuality
    Hong Kong Cases
    Immigration
    Inheritance Rights
    Marraige
    Refoulement
    Same Sex Couple
    Same-sex Couple
    UK Cases
    Workplace Discrimination

    RSS Feed

  • Home
  • 主頁
  • About
  • 關於我們
  • Judicial Development Corner
  • Blog
    • Professional legal blog
    • Student legal blog
  • Contact Us
  • 聯絡我們
  • Related Links
  • 相關連結
  • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition
    • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition 2022
    • Be EnGayged Mooting Competition 2021