Court Reserves Judgement On Same-sex Spousal Visas

The Court of Final Appeal has reserved judgement on a government bid to overturn a ruling that dependant visas should be granted to same-sex partners of expatriates who move to Hong Kong.

The appeal follows a British woman's legal victory last year, when a lower court ruled that the Immigration Department had discriminated against her by refusing to grant her a visa when her female partner moved to the SAR for a job. The women, known only as QT and SS in court, had earlier entered into a civil union in the UK.

The government's lawyer argued in the territory's top court on Monday that the Director of Immigration is not obliged to recognise civil partnerships or adopt policies that benefit people in same-sex unions, because Hong Kong only recognises marriages that are between a man and a woman.

The lawyer told the panel of five judges that the director has to “maintain a strict immigration policy” and limit the definition of a spouse, because people coming to Hong Kong to work can't just bring along any extra person of their choice.

But QT's lawyer argued that such restrictions go against the objective of the dependant visa policy, which is to attract talent to the city, be these people straight or gay.

She argued that same-sex couples could never comply with such restrictions and this therefore amounts to direct discrimination based on sexual orientation.

She also told the court that more than 30 global banks and law firms with a presence in Hong Kong have stated that refusing to grant dependent visas to the same-sex partners of employees impedes their ability to recruit and retain the best people.

After a hearing lasting about five hours, the judges said they would hand down their judgement at a later date.