A FATHER has won his battle to keep his two daughters in Hongkong with him now an order to return them to their mother in China has been quashed. Chan Choi-hung and Chan Choi-ping were allowed to reside in Hongkong with their three siblings after a High Court judge overturned the removal order made against them by the Director of Immigration. Mr Justice Jones decided that the Immigration Tribunal erred to say there was not a single piece of evidence to show that the two girls were born in Hongkong. There was no finding by the tribunal relating to the credibility of the witnesses, the judge said, holding that there was a breach of natural justice. The girls' father, construction site worker Mr Chan Lam-choi, 42, said he married Ms Tang Lin-tai in China in 1979. She sneaked into Hongkong the following year and gave birth to their first daughter in Queen Elizabeth Hospital in May 1984 and was repatriated to China in June. Mr Chan claimed that she came back illegally nine months later and he delivered the two girls himself in June 1986, and April 1987, at their Yuen Long home. He went to the Immigration Department in October 1990 in a bid to regularise the status of his wife and the two children, but a removal order was made against them in August 1991. They were granted bail pending an appeal, during which Mrs Chan gave birth to her fourth daughter and finally a son. Mr Chan gave evidence in the appeal heard in the tribunal and called two neighbours to testify they had seen Mrs Chan when she was pregnant. The appeal, however, was refused on the grounds that Mr Chan had been ''unable to produce a single piece of evidence that the girls were born in Hongkong''. The adjudicators also held that Mr Chan often visited China during 1987 and 1989, and it was likely his wife and daughters were there. His counsel, Mr Barrie Barlow, in his application for a judicial review, contended that the tribunal had failed to follow the requirements of natural justice, and the decision that the girls were not born in Hongkong was illogical and could not stand. On the evidence produced before them, as a matter of law, the adjudicators should conclude that the two girls were born in the territory and enjoyed the right of abode, he said. In his judgement, Mr Justice Jones said it was quite astonishing that the adjudicators should state Mr Chan had failed to produce a single piece of evidence to support his claim. There was evidence from Mr Chan and his two neighbours. Whether they were credible or not was for the adjudicator to decide, said the judge, but the credibility of witnesses was not addressed. If Mr Chan had been given a chance to produce evidence to show his movements, the tribunal might have come to a different decision, he said. Senior Crown Counsel Mr S. H. Kwok appeared for the tribunal.