離婚

 離婚 -

離婚有5種唔同的理由可以提出 - 通姦，不合理行為，分居兩年，同意並分居一年，遺棄一年。家法事法庭只要事實上相信婚姻已經破裂至無可挽救，就會批出離婚令。

通姦證明上比較困難，因為對方通常唔會主動承認。提出方需要證明A同B，有發生性行為，都有一定困難，除非，兩人參加AV演出。不合理行為，可以係精神上，或肉體上，打人，唔畀家用，成日唔返屋企，等等。分居兩年，可以單方面提出離婚。分居一年，但雙方同意，就好簡單。遺棄一年，人都揾唔到，就可以單方面提出離婚。按相方不同情況，最好先問下律師意見。

除非相方同意，或無未成年子女，雙方都需要處理子女的管養權問題。家事法庭一般情況會睇下邊一方係通常負責管教子女，並有更好的資源及時間繼續管教子女，去決定管養權畀邊一方。

贍養費方面，起點係婚姻財富的一半，各人平分。但法庭會考慮，相方的收入及支出，以及合理的生活條件，作出最後安排。當然，如果相方同意，法庭唔會多問。

近年，由於好多香港家庭可能已經移民外國，如英國，加拿大，澳洲等等。如果，要提出離婚，最直接當然係所在國提出。但並非所有情況都適合。例如，相方無未成年子女，係香港有不動產，香港提出離婚，家事法庭可以直接批出有關處理物業的法庭命令。如果，係所在國提出離婚，所在國的法庭命令唔可以直接係香港執行。離婚一方需要係香港高等法院提出申請普通法上執行。第一，普通法上，唔係所有法庭命令可以執行，如 order for sale 就唔得。第二，高院律師費又高又金。

按擬提出離婚一方的個別情況，最好先問下律師的法律意見，再決定係所在國，定係香港提出離婚。

遺產承辦

 遺產承辦 -

辦理遺產承辦，要去遺產承辦處。遺產承辦可分為: 有遺囑承辦，同無遺囑承辦。前者比較方便，需按照平安紙中所述的承辦人去處理承辦。攞左承辦認証後，就按照平安紙中所定的受益人去分配財產。後者，由於無立平安紙，就要按無遺囑承辦法去處理遺產承辦，同遺產分配。

簡單黎講，無遺囑承辦法把逝者的後人分為不同的先後次序。配偶次序最高。如果配偶早亡，子女可以去做承辦。如果無配偶，又無子女，父母可以去做承辦，之後就係逝者的兄弟姐妹啦。而受益人的先後次序，都係同承辦的先後次序一樣。

遺產承辦可以自己處理，或透過律師去處理都可以。通常遺產較多，受益人又多，透過律師去處理比較方便。如果遺產唔多，可以自己同遺產承辦處約時間處理。一般情況，佢地都幫到手。揾律師的缺點當然係要使律師費。

至於申請承辦的文件方面，必須注意逝者名字描述要正確同全面。理由好簡單，如果逝者在生時，曾經改名，佢有可能用唔同名買過並持有不同的不動產或其他資產。如果遺產認証中無呢個名，後人係辦唔到遺產轉名。只可以返遺產承辦處做多次更改。

同樣道理，財產的描述都要正確同全面。樓宇的描述需要按照土地註冊署的描述，銀行戶口號碼就一正要準確。財產描述唔好遺漏。否則，就要返轉頭，去遺產承辦處辦理更改。

多地遺囑

 多地遺囑-

立遺囑，或平安紙時，需要考慮兩方面的事情：(1) 何人會係平安紙中的受益人，和 (2) 財產的性質及地理上的分布情況。第 (1) 點，以前已經講過，重點係邊個係受益人，以及邊個如果唔係受益人，係法律上，可否日後法律上提出訴訟，向遺產執行人追討。

第 (2) 點而言，一般人比較少注意。就不動產黎講，如果立遺囑人在香港，以及海外都有財產，如果生前只立左一份平安紙，唔理係香港立定係海外立。如係香港所立，日後係香港做遺產承辦，去處理香港的不動產，當然唔會有問題。問題就發生係點樣去處理海外的不動產了? 因為香港遺產承辦處的遺產認證，係唔可以攞去海外任何一個國家做所謂 resealing 。如加拿大就唔可以。

結果，後人就唔可以簡單直接係加拿大辦理所在地的不動產。後人需要係加拿大重新做一次遺產承辦。立遺囑人過身的永居地就變得好重要，因為，假如立遺囑人係香港過身，加拿大的遺產承辦需要用香港的承辦法律去處理。當中的律師費支出會大好多。呢個係所謂 conflict of laws 的問題。呢種情況下：客人最好係香港及加拿大分別立一份平安紙。日後，後人可以分別係香港同加拿大辦理遺產承辦。律師費支出會比較低。

如果，海外的不動產處於英國，後人可以用 resealing 的方法去處理承辦。如只得一份香港平安紙，後人可以係香港遺產承辦處攞左遺產認證之後，去英國做 resealing 。反過黎，只得一份英國平安紙，後人就要係英國做遺產認證之後，返香港做 resealing 。但較簡單的方法都係香港同英國分別立一份平安紙。日後，後人可以分別係香港同英國辦理承辦。律師費支出會比較低。

上述因不動產而引起的 conflict of laws 的問題，同樣會發生係如銀行存款上。如後人係加拿大攞住遺產承辦認證返香港的銀行要求提款，香港銀行唔會承認，亦唔會采你。

移民律師

 移民律師 -

一般在英國生活了十年，八年，或者時間更長的華人，如果是逾期居留，都希望有一天能夠正式獲得合法身分。由於，沒有合法身分，無論在生活，工作，以及子女教育上都會面對許多困難和問題。若果能經法律途徑獲得合法身分，以上種種困難和問題自然會一一解決。

英國移民法規對逾期居留者提供多條不同的路徑可獲得合法身分，因應申請人的不同情況，可以透過不同的路徑進行申請。理論上，申請人可以以個人身分直接向內政部提出申請。由於英國移民法規非常複雜，又經常更改，一般人在沒有移民律師代表的情況下，能滿足內政部的申請要求，最後成功獲得合法身分的機會不大。

所以，申請人通常都會找移民律師或移民顧問的服務。到底移民律師或移民顧問有何分別? 前者為經過正式法律訓練，已經成功通過律師專業試的正式英國註冊律師。但後者不是律師，只是從事移民服務的工作者。某些移民顧問可能有多年的經驗，由於沒有經過正式法律訓練，當申請人情況比較複雜時，處理上會有困難。申請人最好初次會面時，正式要求服務提供者透露到底是移民律師，還是移民顧問? 申請人需要選擇正式的移民律師代表提出申請。

移民律師或移民顧問的收費相差非常之大。同一類型的申請事項收費可以為2000英鎊到5000英鎊不等。申請人要如何選擇呢? 一般而言，申請人要多走數間不同的移民律師問下初步法律意見。初步會面，通常不收費的。經驗所得，收費太低的移民律師不會用心和用足夠時間去處理申請，因為每項申請收費太低，只能用數量換質量。收費太高的都不能選，因為收費高並非代表服務好，只是希望用市場不透明獲取最大利益。以上述2000英鎊到5000英鎊的收費為例子，申請人應該選擇律師收費為大約3000英鎊最合適。

授權書

 授權書-

授權書的種類有好多種，即所謂 power of attorney。一般情況下，香港人日常會接觸到的授權書係授權他人幫手賣樓，或者放租。現時，不少港人因為政治，或者其他的原因，需要短時間內離開香港，在港物業又唔可以離港前賣出或者租出。無理由叫地產代理放賣或放租成功後，親身回港辦理手續及簽署交易文件。費時失事。

較理想的方法係離港前，親身上律師樓一趟，係律師面前簽份授權書，再交畀被授權人，去負責簽署買賣，或者放租的文件。注意: 授權書的有效期限為一年。如果係簽署後一年內物業都賣唔出，或者租唔出，原本個份授權書就會失效。授權人係呢種情況下，就需要揾律師簽過份新授權書。當然，律師費要畀多次。

如果離港前，黎唔切揾律師做份授權書，或者做左，但一年已過，物業都未賣出或者租出。現時已經身在海外，可能政治上，或者其他的原因，唔可能或者唔方便再返香港。點樣再做份新的授權書呢? 如果身在海外的國家，能係附近揾到香港律師，去處理授權書的文件，以及見證簽署，之後把簽署好的授權書寄回香港畀被授權人便可。

授權人好多時間侯都擔心如果揾左個靠唔住既被授權人。物業最終賣出，或者租出，被授權人會將所得賣價或租金據為己有。呢個唔使擔心，因為被授權人的權限只在於賣出或租出物業，款項係會按照授權書指定直接畀返授權人，即業主本人。

其他注意事項: 授權書上的授權人簽署式樣必須同對上樓宇買賣文件 (即 last assignment) 簽署式樣一致。否則，一年內揾到買家都無用，因為買家代表律師唔會接受係出於業主的簽署，並視授權書為無效。

Democracy

It is very difficult to define what democracy means.  It comes in all shapes and forms.  We would love to believe that America is a democracy and the UK is also a democracy.  In fact, it is not a black and white thing - it has different shades of meaning to it.  A lot of people lament that democracy in America is dead, because they have got a new president in Donald Trump.  They believe that the very fact that he has been elected the new president is sufficient to prove democracy is not working.

Obviously, without first defining what democracy means before going into all sorts of problems with democracy (whatever that term means) is futile and probably not worth your time reading this article.  Loosely, I think democracy can be said to be a political system in which people can freely vote and elect to be voted to public office without hindrance.  The voting system itself must be fair meaning one person one vote and each vote carries the same weight.  According to these principles, democracy is not a point but a spectrum.

For example, the US system would fail these principles.  Clinton won the popular votes but lost the collegial votes due to the fact that the presidential election is not a direct one.  Therefore, each vote in a smaller state would often carry more weight than one in a bigger state, say California.  This compromise is built-in in the US system so that smaller states would still have a say in the Federation.

Apart from the fairness dimension of a democracy, any political system including democracy (no matter what that means) must be able to regenerate itself from time to time.  Sadly, all system be it physical, biological or social will all become degenerate and corrupted over time.  You may probably call it the second law of thermodynamics - all orderliness will become orderless over time.

After the election, we heard that Clinton was blamming the FBI and we-don't-know-what for her loss in the election.  This reflects how detached the US elite of which she is a member has become over the past decades.  Clinton lost because she ignored the unfairness and the injustice of the system which has made the rich richer and poor poorer.  This only proves why she would never win this election in the present social context of uncontrolled globalisation which is the root cause of where we are at this point.

This is the beauty of the system - when someone so entrenched in the vested interest of the Establishment - the system will be forced to regenerate itself because they will be voted out of the office and, someone else would have a chance to start anew.  Of course, they may not succeed where others have failed and they will also become corrupted in time before they are in trun being voted out again.

In short, Donald Trump as the new president is not itself a problem.  It is only symtomatic of the underlining problems of the system.  Trump was elected because the system is corrupted and people want to have a real change from the status quo.  Ironically, this proves that the system is working, as it is trying to regenerate itself.

Where do we go from here?

It is tempting for us to predict what will happen in future.  However, more often than not these predictions will later be proved to be wrong.  Nevertheess, if we look from a distance and try not to pass the woods for the tree, we may be able to see things in their proper perspective.  That said, how will Donald Trump use his powers and what consequences there will be for the world of his actions or inactions?

Again, if we get to the bottom of it, it is actually a problem of fair distribution of wealth and opportunity (or rather the lack of it).  People have expectation that there should be a leveled playing field so that everyone would have a fair opportunity to succeed if they choose to work hard enough.  Sadly, the reality is just the opposite and becoming more and more so.  People are so angered and frustrated that they would have chosen anyone other than someone who is perceived as within the Establishment as the next president of the USA.  It is really in this context someone so unfit for that office has been elected the next president.

Ironically, history will prove in the coming years that someone as unfit as Donald Trump would actually have turned things around if he would indeed carry his words into action.  It sounds contradictory, does it not?  When we say he is unfit for the office, we are thinking conventionally and presume only someone within the Establishment is fit for this office.  Don't forget that the Establishment has grown so corrupted and detached from the people in the past few decades, it is precisely because Donald Trump is so unfit for the office that makes him fit for that office.

What is so interesting about the trajectory of human affairs and history is that it seldom develops predictably in a linear way.  There is a real chance that Donald Trump - someone seemingly coming out of the woodwork - could make history.  Don't forget that a lot of this uneven distribution of wealth and opportunity stems from the globalization of trade which has provided the capitalists with a system in which to exploit the labour on a global scale.  Yes, the pie has got bigger but the Establishment has also grabbed a much bigger portion of the pie.  People on the lower rungs of the ladder are left with ever less wealth and opportunity.  A rising tide does not lift all boats, because the globalization of trade is not a rising tide.

The truth of the fact is that trade ipso facto is not good.  There is a distinction between good trade and bad trade.  Probably no one today would say slave trade is good.  Slave trade is certainly good and profitable for those who trade in it.  But it is not good, because it is not fair and immoral and inhumane.  Most economists who are themselves also part of the Establishment would tend to blind us from this important distinction.  They know the price of every thing but the value of nothing.  Then, what is good trade?  The trade that is fair and just and enhances the value for everyone involved in it is good.  The current system of world trade is not.  Therefore, it should be rolled back.

There must be a connection between the incomes of the labour and the profit of the company so that unscrupulous exploitation of the labour by the capitalists can be rooted out.  For example, if the company that makes iphones must be made by law to return a certain percentage of the profits to the labour as part of their wages on top of what they have already been paid, the company would still be encouraged to make as much profit as possible.  But, its employees would also benefit from the increased profit.  This would take away the exploitative dimension of the company which has always been factored in its formula for making profit.  This should be the case regardless where in the world the company chooses to make its iphones (just as an example) be it in China or the USA.  If this percentage point is properly set, the company may indeed choose to make its iphones in the USA, because there is no exploitative dimension it can take advantage of the labour in China.  More working opportunities will be left in the USA, hence a fairer distribution of wealth and opportunity.

Efficiency is only part of the formula; justice and fairness is far more important than efficiency itself.  Efficiency is not an end in itself and must be made to serve justice and fairness.  Efficiency represents the price of things but the true value of things lies in justice and fairness.  If and only if Donald Trump sees things in the same light, there is a real opportunity for him to turn things around.