A landmark legal appeal by 12 financial institutions in an LGBT rights case was dismissed by the High Court this morning.
Yesterday, it was reported that 12 global banks applied to the Court of Appeal to intervene in the case of QT, a British lesbian is taking the Hong Kong Immigration Department to court for refusing to grant her a dependant visa.
The banks had planned to argue that the refusal of a dependant visa to LGBT employees’ spouses would adversely affect the recruiting of overseas talents and threaten their corporate culture of diversity and inclusion. They said the current immigration policy against LGBT couples would affect the interests of Hong Kong as an international financial center as a whole.
The 12 institutions involved in the case are ABN AMRO Bank, AIG Insurance Hong Kong, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, the Bank of New York Mellon, Blackrock Management North Asia, Credit Suisse (Hong Kong), Goldman Sachs Services (Hong Kong), Morgan Stanley Asia, Nomura International Hong Kong, the Royal Bank of Canada, Societe Generale and State Street Bank & Trust.
Judge Jeremy Poon pointed out that even with the submissions of these institutions, they would be repeating the same points QT wished to say, adding that the court could “easily see the more rounded picture from the employers’ perspective” without the input from the 12 institutions.
The court has acknowledged the case involves questions of great importance to the public, but nonetheless rejected the submission.
Raymond Chan, the only openly gay lawmaker in Hong Kong, said on Facebook that the court should have understood the significance of QT’s case to the local talent recruitment, saying that the ruling goes against the financial policy of the government, as officials had repeatedly spoken of the need to consolidate Hong Kong’s role as a financial center.
Speaking to Coconuts Hong Kong, Chan said the fact that the banks had tried to intervene is, in itself, “exhilarating”. “In the past, big corporations only supported LGBT rights verbally […] the only way for [LGBT people] to fight for their rights is through legal means, as the issue is often ignored by the government and the press. Going to court involves a lot of money and plaintiffs often risk ‘outing’ themselves in the process.”
The lawmaker hopes that more local corporations will intervene in similar cases and put pressure on the government to reform the legal system to be more inclusive to the LGBT community.
QT entered a civil partnership with another woman, identified in court as SS, in the UK in 2011. When SS relocated to Hong Kong for her job, QT was only allowed to enter with a tourist visa despite previously applying for employment and dependant visas, the latter of which is routinely given to heterosexual spouses.
QT filed a judicial review after her application for a dependant visa to enter and stay in Hong Kong as SS’ spouse was turned down by the Immigration Department. The director of immigration rejected her visa application on the grounds that QT was not legally recognized as SS’ spouse – who was working in Hong Kong with an employment visa – because Hong Kong law only recognizes marriages between one man and one woman.
QT’s application for a judicial review was rejected by the High Court last year. She has since appealed the rejection, and her hearing at the Court of Appeal is due to start later this month.
