|
CACV 12/2019
[2019] HKCA 825
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF APPEAL
CIVIL APPEAL NO 12 OF 2019
(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 499 OF 2018)
_______________
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
H K KOHINOOR |
Applicant |
|
and
|
| |
WESLEY WONG, ESQ. |
Putative Respondent |
|
and
|
| |
DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION |
Putative Interested Party |
_______________
Before: Hon Poon, Pang JJA and Lisa Wong J in Court
Date of Written Submissions: 29 May 2019
Date of Judgment: 30 July 2019
_____________________
J U D G M E N T
_____________________
Hon Poon JA (giving the Judgment of the Court) :
1. By a judgment dated 7 May 2019 ([2019] HKCA 496), the Court of Appeal (Poon JA and Lisa Wong J) dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam (“the Judge”) dated 8 January 2019 refusing to grant leave to him to apply for judicial review. By a Notice of Motion dated 17 May 2019, the applicant now seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
2. In the Notice of Motion, the applicant set out the following grounds :
“ I am not satisfied with the decision given by Appeal Board because it’s far from the ground reality which related with my case. This decision depends only on their guess. They are not aware about facts and real situation about my home country.”
3. In compliance with the directions given by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 20 May 2019, the applicant lodged his written submissions on 29 May 2019. In his written submissions, apart from repeating what was stated in the Notice of Motion, he added that the Bangladeshi police were corrupt and would not do justice to his case. He would face risk of torture or being killed if he were return to his home country.
4. Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed on 20 May 2019 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing. As it is appropriate to do so, this application shall be determined on paper accordingly.
5. Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, 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. Plainly, what was put forward by the applicant in the Notice of Motion and his written submissions do not constitute valid grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. For the reasons that we gave in our judgment, we do not see any prospect of success in the applicant’s intended appeal against the Judge’s order. None of the questions raised by the applicant in the Notice of Motion or in his written submissions gives rise to any question of great general or public importance or is one that ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision. Nor do we see any basis to grant leave under the “otherwise” limb. The statutory criteria for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) are not met.
6. Accordingly, we refuse to give the applicant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss his Notice of Motion.
| (Jeremy Poon) |
(Derek Pang) |
(Lisa Wong) |
Justice of Appeal
|
Justice of Appeal
|
Judge of the Court
of First Instance |
The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person
|