AKBAR JAVED v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CAMP 313/2021

[2022] HKCA 158

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 313 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1844 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

____________________

JUDGMENT

____________________

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

1.  On 11 November 2021, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”) dismissing the Applicant’s application for leave to appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 21 July 2021 refusing to extend time for the Applicant to appeal an earlier order of the Judge dated 14 July 2020 refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office/Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 17 August 2018.

2.  The Applicant now applies by Notice of Motion dated 20 December 2021 for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. In the Notice of Motion, the following is stated:

“I would like to inform Court of Final Appeal. There is some error in law in my decision maker just relied on COI information. I am disagree with the decision of authorities and court as well. The Respondents were totally relied on web news and information. Actual life occur different situation than mentioned COI information. Because its towards to my life in my home land in Pakistan. I do not wish to go back to my home country.”

3.  Under s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of, inter alia, the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal 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.

4.  No question of great general or public importance involved in the proposed appeal is identified in the Notice of Motion. We are unable to see any such question being involved in the proposed appeal. We are satisfied that the intended appeal has no merits and no reasonable prospect of success. There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “otherwise” limb in s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

5.  Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.