|
CAMP 64/2020
[2020] HKCA 964
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF APPEAL
MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 64 OF 2020
(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1711 OF 2018)
________________________
| BETWEEN |
|
|
| |
Jagg Singh |
Applicant |
| |
and |
|
| |
Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non‑Refoulement Claims Petition Office |
1st Putative Respondent |
| |
Director of Immigration |
2nd Putative Respondent |
________________________
Before: Hon Kwan VP, Cheung JA and Barma JA in Court
Date of Written Submission: 16 November 2020
Date of Judgment: 27 November 2020
____________________
J U D G M E N T
____________________
Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):
1. This is the applicant’s application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Kwan VP and Cheung JA) handed down on 23 October 2020 ([2020] HKCA 844) refusing to grant leave to appeal out of time against the judge’s decision dismissing his application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non‑refoulement claim. The applicant is a national of India. His claim was made on the basis that he would be harmed or killed by a supporter of the Congress Party called Jageera. He filed his Notice of Motion on 6 November 2020.
2. Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 9 November 2020 that the notice of motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged a written submission on 16 November 2020. Having considered the papers, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and will proceed to do so.
3. The applicant took out a summons in the court below to seek an extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung. His application was late by one week. His application was refused by the judge on 19 June 2020[1]. The applicant renewed his application to the Court of Appeal for extension of time to appeal on 26 June 2020.
4. On 23 October 2020, the Court of Appeal refused to extend time to appeal against the decision of DHCJ K W Lung because the applicant does not have any prospect of success in the intended appeal.
5. In the Notice of Motion filed on 6 November 2020, the applicant set out his grounds of appeal as follows:
(1) The judges were wrong as a matter of law for not having applied the principle of procedural unfairness to the decision of the Director of Immigration by which the Director and the Adjudicator of the Torture Claims Appeal Board are required to give reasons justifying their decisions.
(2) The judges were wrong as a matter of law for not having applied the principle of irrationality to the decisions made by the Director and the Adjudicator.
(3) The decisions were not reasonable and fair. The right to life is protected under article 28 of the Basic Law and it must be protected from extra-judicial killings that he may face if he is deported back to his country.
(4) The judges did not apply the law properly.
6. Under Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, 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.
7. The applicant has not shown any merits in his intended appeal as his grounds of appeal are not supported by evidence. In particular, he has not demonstrated any reasonably arguable basis that the Court of Appeal was wrong in dismissing his application. He has 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).
8. For the above reasons, we dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 6 November 2020 for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
(Susan Kwan)
Vice President |
(Peter Cheung)
Justice of Appeal
|
(Aarif Barma)
Justice of Appeal |
The Applicant, acting in person
|