RE PEER MOHAMED VARUSAI MEERAN

CAMP 155/2022

[2023] HKCA 477

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 155 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1913 OF 2018)

____________________

____________________

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.  On 14 November 2022, this Court (Cheung and Yuen JJA) gave the decision dismissing the applicant’s extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge To given on 30 July 2021 in which he refused to grant leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board.

2.  The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion, a supporting affirmation both filed on 10 January 2023 and a written submission lodged on 17 January 2023, for leave to appeal against our decision to the Court of Final Appeal out of time. 

3.  Having considered the applicant’s documents, we see no reason to depart from the usual practice of determining applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on paper without an oral hearing.  We have, therefore, proceeded to determine the applicant’s application on the basis of the documents in the case.

4.  The applicant’s notice of motion is clearly late.  According to section 24 of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (‘HKCFAO’), the applicant’s notice of motion ought to have been filed with the Court within 28 days of our extension decision.  The applicant is over 28 days late.  The applicant stated in his affirmation that he was late due to ‘lack of knowledg and insuffiecient sources’.  No further details were provided.  This is a bare allegation unsupported by any explanation.  We will not accept the applicant’s reason for the delay.

5.  The applicant’s notice of motion stated the following :

‘ Respected sir/Madam, I am late for apply due to lack of knowledg and insuffiecient sources. Please accept my filling application so that i can process my case further. I hope i will get your favour.’

6.  In the applicant’s written submission, he stated that he was not satisfied with his decision.  He stated that so many things were ignored.  He stated that his country was hard to live in.  He stated that the Board ignored many things.  He stated that he will go back but he needs more time.  He stated that police use their political influence.  He stated that his country was corrupt.  He stated that he was an asylum seeker without resources.

II.  Legal principles

7.  Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

III.  Our view

8.  The matters stated by the applicant in his notice of motion do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised in his documents.

9.  We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

IV.  Disposition

10.  For these reasons, the notice of motion is dismissed.