Children's Residence for the JUPAS Local Student Route

For children taking the JUPAS route, the key point is the cut-off date of 31 May in the year the course begins. Under the current revised eligibility, dependant children must, within one or two years before that date, meet the requirement for days resident in Hong Kong or full-time study; if they do not, the application will still be accepted, but institutions will treat it as a non-JUPAS case, losing the advantage of the JUPAS route in competing for University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded places. Below we break down the time calculation method and the way to verify it.

First, distinguish the three annual cycles

The JUPAS application cycle and the year of course commencement are not the same concept; before planning, parents should first confirm which year their child falls under. As of 18 August 2026, the official JUPAS page shows that the 2026 application cycle began in October 2025, and that year is not affected by the new revision. In other words, students currently in Form Five who will move up to Form Six in September 2026 are not bound by the new rules, and parents need not adjust their Hong Kong residence arrangements on that account.

Those who genuinely need to replan are students commencing courses in 2027 or later. A transition arrangement applies in 2027, and from 2028 the stricter two-year residence rule applies across the board. The calculation reference date is the same for both years — 31 May of the course-commencement year — but the look-back period and conditions differ.

2027 transition arrangement: two pathways within one year

Dependant children commencing courses in 2027 must, within the one-year period ending on 31 May 2027, meet one of the following:

• be enrolled as a full-time student at a local school offering an Education Bureau (EDB)-recognised formal curriculum; or
• be away from Hong Kong for no more than 90 days within that year.

In other words, parents may choose to qualify via “student status” or via “days resident in Hong Kong”. The former requires the child to be continuously enrolled in a recognised local curriculum during that year, while the latter permits brief departures, but the total days away in the year must not exceed 90.

From 2028: two years’ residence as the principle

For children commencing courses in 2028 or later, the requirement is markedly higher. Applicants must meet the minimum two-year residence rule — that is, no more than 90 days away from Hong Kong each year — or, within the two years ending on 31 May of the course-commencement year, be enrolled as a full-time student at a local school.

Note that the two 2028 conditions are not as simple as “either/or”. The two-year residence rule is calculated year by year, meaning each year must individually maintain no more than 90 days away; whereas the full-time study pathway must cover the entire two-year period. If the child changes school mid-way, takes a leave of absence, or switches to part-time study, that pathway is broken, and the family can only fall back on the days-resident calculation.

Practical calculation of days away

“No more than 90 days away from Hong Kong” is counted day by day, not as consecutive days. Parents should understand it as: within the specified look-back period, any day not spent in Hong Kong counts towards the 90-day cap. Short trips home to visit relatives, holidays abroad, and departures with parents on work trips all accumulate.

The calculation cut-off point is 31 May of the course-commencement year, not the JUPAS application submission date or the Diploma examination results release date. For example, a student commencing in September 2028 has a two-year look-back period running from 1 June 2026 to 31 May 2028. Parents should use this date as the boundary and work backwards to calculate the child’s days away each year.

In practical terms, the safest approach is to retain the child’s immigration records. The Immigration Department’s arrival and departure records are the most direct basis, which parents can review periodically and tally themselves. If the child holds a Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport or other travel document, stamps may also be recorded on entry and exit, but electronic records remain the most complete. Parents are advised to rely on the official immigration records rather than estimating from memory or school leave notes alone.

Determining full-time study

Those qualifying via “being enrolled as a full-time student at a local school” should note the premise of an “EDB-recognised formal curriculum”. Generally, full-time curricula at local primary and secondary schools and recognised tertiary institutions fall within this category, but parents should confirm with the child’s institution whether the programme is EDB-recognised. Whether international schools and private schools are included should also be verified with the institution or the Education Bureau.

Another point is the continuity of “study”. Official facts only state that the child must be enrolled as a full-time student, and do not address how transfers, the summer holiday period, or the gap after graduation are handled. These procedural details are not recorded in official facts, and the specific approach must be verified with JUPAS or the relevant institution rather than assumed.

Consequences of not meeting the rules: not disqualification

This is the point parents most easily misunderstand. Children who do not meet the residence rules can still submit an application via JUPAS, but institutions will treat it as a non-JUPAS case. The difference is this: the JUPAS route is the main channel for competing uniformly for UGC-funded places, whereas non-JUPAS cases are considered individually by institutions, with a different competitive environment and assessment criteria.

In other words, the child will not be shut out, but will lose the JUPAS route’s advantage in competing for funded places. How substantial this “advantage” is has not been quantified in official facts, and parents should not lightly trust rumoured admission rates or score comparisons circulating in the community. The key point: being handled as non-JUPAS does not mean the application cannot be made, nor does it mean admission will certainly be refused — only that the channel differs.

Judicial review outcome: policy does not constitute discrimination

Some parents may question whether the new rules are fair. In 2026, the High Court handed down a ruling in a judicial review case. The case was jointly brought by 87 mainland student parents, challenging the policy that dependant children must have resided in Hong Kong for one full year before applying for government-funded university places. The judge (高浩文) ruled that the measure did not constitute discrimination and was not unreasonable; the parents lost the case and were ordered to pay costs.

The significance of this ruling is that the policy’s legality has been confirmed by the court and will not be overturned on discrimination grounds in the short term. When planning their children’s education pathway, parents should proceed according to the current rules rather than hoping the policy will fail. Of course, the policy may be adjusted in future, but as of 18 August 2026, the above rules and ruling outcome remain in force.

Planning advice: work backwards from the cut-off point

In summary, parents’ planning logic should be: first confirm the child’s course-commencement year, then use 31 May of that year as the baseline and work backwards to calculate the days resident within the look-back period. If the child has long studied in Hong Kong with few days away, there is usually little problem; but if the child has returned to the mainland for an extended period, or plans to leave Hong Kong in a key year, the days must be tallied carefully.

A common misconception is to count only the year before application. From 2028, the rule is “no more than 90 days away each year”, meaning every year within the look-back period must meet the cap individually; one year of extra residence cannot offset another year’s excess days away. Parents should split the entire look-back period into individual years and check each, ensuring every year complies with the cap.

Another practical point is retaining proof. Although official facts do not list the required documents, immigration records, school enrolment certificates, and academic reports are all reasonable supporting evidence. Exactly what needs to be submitted must follow what JUPAS or the institution publishes at the time. Parents should set up a file early and keep relevant records year by year, avoiding a last-minute discovery that information is incomplete.

Information verification reminder

All policy figures and ruling content in this article are drawn from official announcements and media reports accessible as of 18 August 2026. The official JUPAS page updates application eligibility from time to time, and individual requirements at the institution level may differ from the overall JUPAS rules. Before key dates, parents should consult the official JUPAS website and the admission pages of their preferred institutions directly, and rely on the latest publications. If the child’s situation is special (for example, a long period away from Hong Kong, or a switch to a non-local curriculum), parents should enquire with JUPAS or the institution early rather than making a final decision based solely on this article or community information.