### Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance 《擄拐和管養兒童條例》

8. Reports
For discharging a Central Authority’s functions in relation to a child under Articles 7 and 21 of the Convention, the Secretary for Justice may— (Amended L.N. 362 of 1997; 16 of 2014 s. 10)
(a) request—
(i) the Director of Social Welfare;
(ii) the Commissioner of Police;
(iii) the Director of Immigration;
(iv) any other person as he may specify,
to make a report to him in writing with respect to any matter which appears to him to be relevant;
(b) request any court to which a written report relating to the child has been made to send him a copy of the report,
and such a request shall be duly complied with.
[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 6 U.K.]

9. Proof of documents and evidence
(1) For the purposes of section 16, and Article 14 of the Convention, a decision or determination of a judicial or administrative authority outside Hong Kong may be proved by a duly authenticated copy of the decision or determination, and any document purporting to be such a copy shall be deemed to be a true copy unless the contrary is shown. (Amended 16 of 2014 s. 11)
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a copy is duly authenticated if it bears the seal, or is certified by a judge or officer, of the authority in question.
(3) For the purposes of Articles 14 and 30 of the Convention, a document mentioned in Article 8 of the Convention or a certified copy of the document shall be sufficient evidence of the matters stated in it.
[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 7 U.K.]

10. Declarations by Court of First Instance
The Court of First Instance may, on an application made for the purposes of Article 15 of the Convention by a person appearing to the Court of First Instance to have an interest in the matter, make a declaration that the removal of a child from Hong Kong, or the retention of the child outside Hong Kong, was wrongful within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.
(Amended 25 of 1998 s. 2)[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 8 U.K.]

11. Suspension of court’s powers in cases of wrongful removal
The reference in Article 16 of the Convention to deciding on the merits of rights of custody shall be construed as a reference to making, varying, discharging, suspending or reviving after being so suspended a custody order.
[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 9 U.K.]

### Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance 《擄拐和管養兒童條例》

12. Rules of court for giving effect to Part 2
(Amended 16 of 2014 s. 12)(1) The Rules Committee constituted under section 55 of the High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4) may make rules of court for giving effect to this Part as appears to the Committee to be necessary or expedient. (Replaced 16 of 2014 s. 12)
(2) Without affecting the generality of subsection (1), the rules of court made by the Rules Committee may provide—
(a) for the procedure on an application for the return of a child, the documents and information to be furnished and the notices to be given in connection with the application;
(b) for the giving of notices by or to a court for the purposes of Article 16 of the Convention and section 11 and the proceedings to which those provisions apply;
(c) for enabling a person who wishes to make an application under the Convention in a Contracting State to obtain from any court in Hong Kong an authenticated copy of any decision of that court relating to the child to whom the application relates. [cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 10(2) U.K.]
(3) The power to make rules of court under section 54 of the High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4) shall include power to make rules of court for the purposes of this section. (Amended 25 of 1998 s. 2)

13. Cost of applications
The costs mentioned in the third paragraph of Article 26 of the Convention shall not be borne by the Secretary for Justice or any other authority in Hong Kong except so far as they fall to be so borne by virtue of the grant of legal aid under the Legal Aid Ordinance (Cap. 91).
(Amended L.N. 362 of 1997)[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 11 U.K.]

14. Termination of existing custody’s orders, etc.
Where an order is made by the Court of First Instance for the return of a child under this Ordinance, any custody order relating to the child shall cease to have effect.
(Amended 25 of 1998 s. 2)[cf. 1985 c. 60 s. 25(1) U.K.]

### Child Abduction and Custody Ordinance 《擄拐和管養兒童條例》

15. Court of First Instance may make location order relating to child’s whereabouts
(1) In this section—
applicable information (適用資料), in relation to a child, means information about the child’s whereabouts or other circumstances relevant to locating the child;
applicable proceedings (適用程序) means proceedings for the return of a child under the Convention that are commenced, or about to be commenced, in Hong Kong or in another Contracting State.
(2) For any applicable proceedings relating to a child, the Court of First Instance may, on application, make a location order providing for one or more of the following—
(a) requiring a person to provide the Court with applicable information that the person has or may reasonably obtain about the child;
(b) requiring a public officer to provide the Court with applicable information that the officer has or may reasonably obtain in an official capacity about the child.
(3) A location order made for any applicable proceedings may also provide that the applicable information provided in compliance with the order may only be used for the applicable proceedings. 
(4) Any of the following persons may apply for a location order—
(a) a party to the applicable proceedings;
(b) the Secretary for Justice.
(5) Unless otherwise directed by the Court of First Instance, the application may be made ex parte.
(6) The Court of First Instance may make a location order despite the production of the child before a judicial or administrative authority, or the Central Authority, of Hong Kong or another Contracting State.
(7) A person to whom a location order applies must comply with it, regardless of whether or not—
(a) there is any restriction imposed by a law or agreement concerning the disclosure of the applicable information; or
(b) the applicable information is subject to legal professional privilege.
(8) A person is not excused from complying with a location order only because doing so may incriminate the person or the person’s spouse.
(9) However, a statement made by a person in compliance with a location order is not admissible in evidence against the person, or against the person’s spouse, in proceedings for an offence other than perjury.