-3homeless, since the Housing Authority immediately repossessed her late husband’s public housing unit. She was without family or friends in Hong Kong and was admitted to a shelter for street sleepers. 6. On 20 March 2006, Madam Kong applied for CSSA but was unsuccessful. Her application was refused because the Government’s policy has, since 1 January 2004, been that persons who have resided in Hong Kong for less than seven years do not qualify for CSSA, save where, in exceptional circumstances, the Director of Social Welfare (“the Director”) waives that residence requirement as a matter of discretion. The policy was aimed at Mainland immigrants. Madam Kong’s case was not considered appropriate for the exercise of that discretion and her appeal to the Social Security Appeal Board against that decision was rejected. B. 7. The decisions of the Courts below She was granted legal aid and instituted judicial review proceedings to challenge the Director’s decision to reject her CSSA application on the ground that the imposition of the seven-year residence requirement is inconsistent with Articles 25, 36 and 145 of the Basic Law, as well as Article 22 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights.2 8. On 23 June 2009, Mr Justice Andrew Cheung (as Mr Justice Cheung CJHC then was) dismissed her application for judicial review.3 His Lordship’s decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.4 2 All set out in Section D of this judgment. 3 [2009] 4 HKLRD 382. 4 Stock VP, Lam and Barma JJ, CACV 185/2009 (17 February 2012).