CACV 330/2022, [2023] HKCA 792
On appeal from [2022] HKCFI 2398
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF APPEAL
CIVIL APPEAL NO 330 OF 2022
(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 83 OF 2019)
________________________
BETWEEN
Tubagus Yusup
Applicant
alias Tubagus
alias Tubagus Yusuf
alias Tubagus Tubagus
and
Torture Claims Appeal Board
Putative
Respondent
and
Director of Immigration
Putative
Interested Party
________________________
Before:
Hon Kwan VP and G Lam JA in Court
Date of Written Submissions:
6 March 2023
Date of Judgment:
30 June 2023
________________
J U D G M E N T
________________
Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):
1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 18 January 2023 ([2023] HKCA 77 ). The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 5 August 2022 refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning his non-refoulement claim.
2. Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged written submissions on 6 March 2023. Having considered his written submissions and the papers, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.
Grounds of appeal
3. In his Notice of Motion filed on 14 February 2023, the applicant only stated that all the judgments are not good for him and he wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal.
4. In his written submissions, he contended that:
(1) His enemies are very powerful and they bribed the police. They can kill him at any time and he is helpless in Indonesia;
(2) The other places in Indonesia are also not safe for him;
(3) The decisions of the Director of Immigration and Torture Claims Appeal Board are very unreasonable.
Analysis and disposition
5. Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484 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 Appea l, 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 import ance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.
6. The applicant’s grounds and submissions in the present application are just bare assertions without particulars or evidence in support. He failed to show that the Court of Appeal was wrong in dismissing his appeal. He also failed to identify 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. For the above reasons, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 14 February 2023.
(Susan Kwan)
(Godfrey Lam)
The Applicant (Appellant), acting in person