Hong Kong: Another Landmark Victory For Hong Kong's LGBT Community

Last Updated: 25 June 2019
Article by Helen Colquhoun and David Smail

It is fitting that World Pride Month 2019 brings with it an important victory for Hong Kong's LGBT community. On 6 June, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal ruled in favour of Angus Leung's bid to grant him and his same-sex husband the right to government spousal benefits and their election for joint tax assessment. The judgment is the latest in a string of decisions focused on the rights of same-sex couples in Hong Kong, coming as it does less than a year following a similar high profile decision on the right of same-sex partners to apply for a dependent's visa (QT v Director of Immigration [2018] HKCFA 28).

Two key decisions

Mr. Leung commenced employment as an immigration officer with the Hong Kong government in 2003. In 2014, he married his same-sex partner, Scott Adams, in New Zealand where same-sex marriage is legally recognised. The couple were issued with a New Zealand Marriage Certificate.

The judgment centres around two key decisions taken by the government:

  1. The Benefits Decision. Under the Civil Service Regulations, civil servants such as Mr. Leung are entitled to various medical and dental benefits that extend to his/her "spouse". In anticipation of his marriage in New Zealand, Mr. Leung sought to update his marital status so that Mr. Adams could gain access to these spousal benefits. The Civil Service Bureau replied that Mr. Leung’s marriage was not formally recognised under Hong Kong law, which only recognises heterosexual and monogamous marriage. Accordingly, Mr. Adams was not regarded as a spouse and had no entitlement to claim spousal benefits.
  2. The Tax Decision. In 2015, Mr. Leung attempted to elect for joint assessment when filing his salaries tax return - a benefit that is commonly available to married tax payers. However, the Inland Revenue Department's e-filing system was not designed to accept two "Mr" or two "Mrs" - the prefixes had to be gender variant. After raising what he considered to be a technical issue with the Inland Revenue Department, they replied that Mr. Leung and Mr. Adams were not "spouses" within the meaning of Hong Kong law and therefore could not avail themselves of joint assessment.

Mr. Leung challenged the Benefits Decision and the Tax Decision by way of judicial proceedings. He claimed that the decisions unlawfully discriminated against him on the ground of his sexual orientation.

The Court of First Instance ruled in favour of Mr. Leung on the Benefits Decision but against him on the Tax Decision. This was later overturned by the Court of Appeal and, as a result, Mr. Leung’s challenges to both decisions failed.

Mr. Leung was finally granted leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

Discrimination Law 101: Justification

In all discrimination cases, the correct approach is to determine whether there is differential treatment on a prohibited ground and, only if this can be demonstrated, then, to examine whether it can be justified.

The justification test consists of four steps or elements: (i) does the differential treatment pursue a legitimate aim; (ii) is the differential treatment rationally connected to that legitimate aim; (iii) is the differential treatment no more than necessary to accomplish the legitimate aim; and (iv) has a reasonable balance been struck between the societal benefits arising from the application of differential treatment and the interference with the individual’s equality rights.

There was no dispute with respect to (i). It was accepted by the government that its policies had treated Mr. Leung and his husband differently when compared with other opposite-sex spouses. It was also common ground and accepted by Mr. Leung that the government's stated aim in implementing the Benefits Decision and the Tax Decision was in principle legitimate. Although the aim had been articulated in various ways, generally speaking the government said in both cases that it was to protect and/or not undermine the concept and institution of marriage - being the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, as understood in and under the laws of Hong Kong.

The real battleground between the parties lay in ground (ii) - whether the differential treatment was "rationally connected" to the government's stated aim of protecting or not undermining the institution of marriage in Hong Kong. It is here that the government ran into difficulty. In a nutshell, the Court asked:

"How is it said that allowing Mr. Adams medical and dental benefits weakens the institution of marriage in Hong Kong? Similarly, how does permitting the appellant to elect for joint assessment of his income tax liability under the [Inland Revenue Ordinance] impinge on the institution of marriage in Hong Kong? It cannot logically be argued that any person is encouraged to enter into an opposite-sex marriage in Hong Kong because a same-sex spouse is denied those benefits or to joint assessment to taxation."

In other words, the Court could not agree with the lower court's analysis that the difference in treatment received by Mr. Leung was rationally connected to the stated aim underlying the Benefits Decision and the Tax Decision. This finding was fatal to the government's case and rendered any consideration of the third and fourth steps unnecessary.

Mr. Leung’s appeal was allowed accordingly.

Circular reasoning and hypocrisy

The Court held that it was circular and fallacious to argue that restricting financial benefits to opposite-sex married couples was necessary given that heterosexual marriage is the only form of marriage in Hong Kong law (an argument that had been rejected previously by the same Court in QT).

The Court also threw a spotlight on the government's stated claim as being an equal opportunities employer. When Mr. Leung applied for his position with the government, the advertisement came with a note stating: "As an Equal Opportunities Employer, the Government is committed to eliminating discrimination in employment. The vacancy advertised is open to all applicants meeting the basic entry requirement irrespective of their…sexual orientation". In addition, the government had adopted a Code of Practice against Discrimination in Employment on the Ground of Sexual Orientation. This irony was not lost on the Court. It found it difficult to see how the government could on the one hand adhere to published employment policies that claimed to be dedicated to the elimination of discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation, while at the same time deny to a married same-sex couple the same employment benefits that are available to a married opposite-sex couple.

In a final jab, the Court commented on the Inland Revenue Department's apparent willingness to recognise polygamous marriage for the purposes of joint assessment. Here, the government's policy is to allow a polygamous man to choose which of his spouses he would prefer to designate as his "principal" wife. Query how such a policy can be viewed as serving the government's stated aim of promoting "traditional" marriage in Hong Kong, which is not only heterosexual but monogamous.

What next for same-sex rights in Hong Kong?

On the one hand, the decision in Leung is more impactful and far-reaching than QT. Whereas the scope of QT was fairly narrow and focused on the right of same-sex couples to apply for a dependent's visa, Leung invokes the question of extending spousal benefits more generally and could have implications for other areas including public housing, social welfare and public medical benefits. Indeed, this was a concern expressed by the Court of Appeal at the lower stage, which was reluctant to open the floodgates to future claims.

On the other hand, the decision only applies to government benefits/government employees and not to those in the private sector. And in practice, most multinational corporates tend to already have in place progressive benefits policies on a global or regional basis that provide similar or equal protections for same-sex employees, recognising as they do that the need to attract talent is king/queen.

Similarly, while last month Taiwan became the first Asian country to recognise same-sex marriage, the Hong Kong Legislative Council does not have a reputation for being fast-moving or responsive to public attitudes. Take the comments made by the recently appointed Chairperson of the Equal Opportunities Commission, Ricky Chu, who last month said that the debate over legalising same-sex marriage in Hong Kong “will not yield practical results”. An amendment to the Marriage Ordinance is probably some way off.

There is no arguing, however, that the decision in Leung is a truly landmark decision, and will surely pave the way for similar cases going forward.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions