RE DIMALANTA SALOME LUPOS

CACV 216/2024, [2025] HKCA 841

On Appeal From [2024] HKCFI 1411

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 216 OF 2024

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 583 OF 2019)

__________________________________

__________________________________

_____________

DECISION

_____________

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

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.  On 9 January 2025, this Court (Cheung and G Lam JJA) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge To given on 23 May 2024 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

2.  The facts and issues of the appeal as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it are set out in our judgment. We will not repeat them here.

3.  The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion annexed with grounds of appeal filed on 14 January 2025, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant stated in her notice of motion the following in summary :

1)  The applicant will be harmed or tortured by her abusive husband if she returns[1];

2)  The applicant is now 7 months pregnant with a partner here in Hong Kong[2];

3)  The applicant’s abusive husband in the Philippines used to verbally attack, then physically kick and punch her[3];

4)  The applicant’s abusive husband would use the money he earned to gamble, then leaving no money to his family[4];

5)  The applicant would not need to go through living nightmare if she could stay in Hong Kong[5];

6)  Many cases of violence against women go unreported, victims do not get enough support[6];

7)  Police and government are unwilling to deal with domestic violence cases[7]; and

8)  Relocation is out of question as moving to a place without family is immeasurable hardship[8].

4.  The applicant’s written submissions lodged on 27 January 2025 are essentially a repetition of the entire contents of the grounds of appeal.

II.  Our view

5.  Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘Ordinance’) 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.

6.  The matters stated by the applicant in her notice of motion and written submissions are broad and vague assertions that do not pertain to nor explain and elaborate on the particular circumstances of the applicant. Findings of fact are within the province of the Board. In any event, the matters stated 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 Ordinance. Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters raised by the applicant.

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

III.  Disposition

8.  For these reasons, the notice of motion dated 14 January 2025 is dismissed.