RE SRI SUYATI

CAMP 24/2022, [2023] HKCA 1137

On Appeal From [2021] HKCFI 1121

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 24 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 95 OF 2021)

_________________________

_________________________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.  This court handed down judgment on 10 February 2023 ([2023] HKCA 122) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal against an order of DHCJ P. Li given on 27 April 2021 in which he refused to grant an extension of time for the applicant to seek leave to apply for judicial review in respect of her non‑refoulement claim.

2.  The facts and issues in the application before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.  On 13 February 2023, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal against this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

4.  The applicant stated her grounds in the Notice of Motion as follows:

“I would like to [inform] the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied on COI Information and my previous facts which were in favour while rejecting my claim. Actual Life occur different situation then what is mentioned in COI Information. The Officer and [court] prefers to ignore the [overwhelming] of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is [betray] a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not reasonable.”

5.  The Registrar of Civil Appeals directed the applicant to lodge written submissions on or before 27 February 2023. The applicant lodged her written submissions as directed which may be summarized as follows:

(1)  high standards of fairness are required in the determination of a torture claim on the part of the decision maker;

(2)  The decision maker is under a duty to act fairly.

6.  As it is appropriate to do so, the Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing.

7.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) provides that 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.

8.  The applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all. She has not identified any errors in the judgment of this court, or any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.

9.  Nor do we see any basis for granting leave under the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 13 February 2023 is dismissed.