ALIGO ALMA CARLOS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CAMP 551/2022, [2024] HKCA 123

On appeal from [2022] HKCFI 2879

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 551 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2292 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This is the applicant’s notice of motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 15 June 2023 ([2023] HKCA 746). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 20 September 2022 dismissing the application for leave to seek judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning the applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

2.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the applicant shall lodge written submissions on or before 3 July 2023. It was further directed that the notice of motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing upon compliance with the said direction or the expiry of the time for complying with the direction. The applicant did not lodge any written submissions by the prescribed deadline. Having considered the papers of this case, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.

3.  The applicant is a national of the Philippines. She entered Hong Kong to work as a foreign domestic helper in 2015. Her employment contract was terminated prematurely on 22 February 2016. She did not leave Hong Kong and subsequently overstayed. She surrendered to the Immigration Department on 31 May 2016. On 23 August 2016, she lodged a non-refoulement claim on the basis that, if refouled, she would be harmed or killed by her husband as she has an affair with another man.

4.  The applicant stated her grounds of appeal in the notice of motion filed on 19 June 2023 which may be summarized as follows:

(1)  The judges did not consider her summons for extension of time and did not scrutinize her application properly.

(2)  The Director of the Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board did not scrutinize her claim properly.

(3)  She has severe problem in her home country. If she returns to her home country, her enemy would kill her.

Analysis and disposition

5.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

6.  The applicant’s grounds are just bare assertion without any support. The Court of Appeal has duly considered her application and provided detailed explanation for the dismissal. She has not identified any mistakes in the judgment of the Court of Appeal nor has she raised any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b). There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

7.  We therefore refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 19 June 2023.