RE MALKIT SINGH

CAMP 509/2021

[2023] HKCA 564

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 509 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 338 OF 2017)

______________________

______________________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

Hon Yuen JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This court handed down judgment on 18 November 2022 ([2022] HKCA 1707) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal against an order of M Poon J (as she then was) given on 19 September 2017 in which she refused the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non‑refoulement claim.

2.  The facts and issues in the application before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.  On 8 December 2022, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  He did not provide any ground of appeal except for saying that “I want to challenge the decision”.

4.  In compliance with the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals made on 8 December 2022, the applicant lodged his written submissions on 22 December 2022.  As it is appropriate to do so, the Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing.

5.  In the applicant’s written submissions, he stated that his life is in danger in his home country as his enemy is powerful and he would not receive any protection from the police or other government authorities.  He complained that the Director of Immigration, the Torture Claims Appeal Board and the court all rejected his case.  He requested to go to the Court of Final Appeal to pursue his claim.

6.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted if 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.

7.  Having regard to the judgment of this court, the applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all. No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.     

8.  Nor do we see any basis for granting leave under the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

9.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 8 December 2022 is dismissed.