Migration Jurisprudence from the South › Hong Kong

Vallejos v. Commissioner of Registration

Court of Final Appeal, Hong Kong · Hong Kong · 2013-03-25 · National court

Citation: FACV 19 & 20/2012
Type of case: Constitutional and human rights
Outcome: Decided against the migrant side

Question

May the Immigration Ordinance exclude foreign domestic helpers from being “ordinarily resident”, so that their years in Hong Kong do not count towards permanent residence?

What the court decided

Yes. Given the nature of helpers’ residence (tied to a specific employer and contract, with return expected), the exclusion is consistent with Article 24(2)(4) of the Basic Law.

In plain language

A domestic worker from the Philippines had worked in Hong Kong for many years. Most people who live there for seven years can become permanent residents, but the law says time as a foreign domestic helper does not count. The highest court said that rule is allowed.

Dalam bahasa sederhana

Seorang pekerja rumah tangga dari Filipina sudah bekerja di Hong Kong bertahun-tahun. Kebanyakan orang yang tinggal tujuh tahun di sana bisa menjadi penduduk tetap, tetapi hukum menyatakan masa kerja sebagai pekerja rumah tangga asing tidak dihitung. Pengadilan tertinggi menyatakan aturan itu boleh.

Pertanyaan: Bolehkah UU Imigrasi mengecualikan pekerja rumah tangga asing dari status “biasa bertempat tinggal”, sehingga tahun-tahun mereka di Hong Kong tidak dihitung untuk izin tinggal tetap?

What happened afterwards

2011-09-30: Court of First Instance finds the exclusion unconstitutional.
2012-03-28: Court of Appeal reverses.
2013-03-25: Court of Final Appeal dismisses the appeal. Law unchanged.

Sources

Open this decision in the interactive collection (compare, filter, Indonesian view, downloads).

Cite as: Institute for Migrant Rights (2026), Migration Jurisprudence from the South, version 0.1, https://theimr.org/court-decisions/d/vallejos-2013/. This page summarizes a court decision for research and advocacy; it is not legal advice.